CONSTITUTIONAL & PARLIAMENTARYINFORMATION

—56th year, No. 191

Nairobi, May 8th – 11th, 2006

CONTENTS

Presentation On The Parliamentary System Of KenyaSamuel Waweru NDINDIRI (Kenya)........................................................................................................................................3

Parliamentary Codes Of Ethics: Recent Developments In CanadaMarc BOSC (Canada)...........................................................................................................................................................13

The Functioning Of The Institute Of Urgency In The Chilean Par-liamentCarlos HOFFMANN-CONTRERAS (Chile)..................................................................................................................................27

A Presentation Of The Strategic Development Plan Of The Par-liamentOf Burkina Faso 2004–2014Prosper VOKOUMA (Burkina Faso)........................................................................................................................................31

The Establishment Of A Digital ChamberWon-Jong SANG (Republic of Korea)....................................................................................................................................57

The Office And Powers Of The Speaker/President.....................................................................................................................67

The Role Of Parliaments And Parliamentarians In Promoting Re-conciliation In Society After Civil Strife..................................

............................................................................................89

Portugal And The Convergence CriteriaAdelina de Sá Carvalho (Portugal)....................................................................................................................................107

Details Of The Bicameral System In Burundi And The Three FunctionsOf The SenateJean Sindayigaya (Burundi)...............................................................................................................................................113

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

PRESENTATION ON THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF KENYA

—

Samuel Waweru NdindiriSecretary General of the National Assembly (Kenya)

HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDThe British colonial administration, which was in charge of the then Kenya

protectorate, established a Legislative Council (LEGCO) in 1907 to advise the then Chief Minister on the running of the colony. Its Members were nom-inated from the administration with the Chief Minister as Speaker, on the one hand, and the settler farming community on the other.

Kenya became a de facto British colony in 1920, with the Governor rep-resenting the King. For many years, the African population which had no vote, was represented in the LEGCO by an appointee of the Governor. The first African Member was nominated in 1944.

In 1957, after the acquiring of voting rights by Africans based on wealth and education, the first eight elected Africans joined the LEGCO. This devel-opment accelerated the country’s movement towards independence in 1963. The LEGCO became the first bi-cameral parliament. However, this did not last long as the Senate merged with the House of Representatives to form the National Assembly in 1966.

The country has since independence had a consistent Parliamentary Sys-tem of Government, with the President both as an elected Head of State and a Member of the National Assembly representing a constituency. General elections have been regularly (every five years) conducted to renew the mandate of the Government.

Post-independence Kenya became a de facto one party state in 1967 but matters changed substantially in 1982, when parliament passed a law to make it legally so. However, after a lot of agitation, the constitution was amended in 1991 to allow for the country to revert to political pluralism.

3

This enabled a joint opposition alliance to remove the ruling party KANU, which had been in power since independence, in the 2002 General Elec-tions. The current Parliament is the 9th Parliament.

Following the clamour for the review of the constitution which gathered momentum in the 1980s, the Constitution of Kenya Review Act, Chapter 3A of the Laws of Kenya was enacted by Parliament in 2001 to facilitate a com-prehensive review of the Constitution by the people of Kenya. The objectives of the review process were to guarantee peace, national unity and integrity of the Republic of Kenya, to establish a free and democratic system of gov-ernment and to provide for the separation of power and checks and bal-ances of the three organs of state, i.e. the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. The review also sought to promote people’s participation in elec-tions, devolution of power, to recognise ethnic and regional diversity, and to ensure provision of basic necessities for all Kenyans, among others.

The review process which commenced in 2001 was conducted by the Constitution of Kenya Review Commission, the Constituency Constitutional Forum, the National Constitutional Forum, the Referendum and the National Assembly.

All the organs of review were expected to be accountable to the people of Kenya and to ensure that the review process was an all inclusive one taking care of the rights and interests of all groups (socio-economic status: race, gender, religion, age, disability, minority, etc.) and the national interest.

At the conclusion of the review exercise at the National Constitutional Forum, now popularly known as “the Bomas” (after the Bomas of Kenya venue where the talks were conducted), a Referendum, as stipulated by the Review Act, was conducted on the Draft Constitution. The document was re-jected by the people by 57% to 43% in a National Vote. The process had gone full circle and now the government has gone back to the drawing board to chart the review process once again.

COMPOSITION OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLYKenya is divided into 210 constituencies, but the House has a total mem-

bership of 224 comprising 210 elected, 12 nominated Members and 2 ex-officio Members, i.e., the Attorney General and the Speaker.

The 12 Nominated Members’ slots are shared between the political parties on the basis of the number of seats they hold in the National As-sembly. This number is determined by the Electoral Commission of Kenya which is an independent constitutional body that supervises presidential, parliamentary and local government elections.

The Speaker is elected by the House when it first meets after the General Elections. The Speaker has no constituency and in case he is an elected Member, he has to relinquish that seat and a by-election be conducted in his constituency.

On the other hand, the Deputy Speaker is an elected Member of Parlia-ment and does not resign his seat upon election. He may also remain an active member of his political party while the Speaker is usually expected to remain non-partisan during his/her term.

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

The other political leaders in the House are: i. The Leader of Government Business who is normally the Vice – Presid-

ent of the country. He/she has a deputy who is usually a senior Minister in the Cabinet.

ii. The Leader of the Official Opposition Party is the leader of a Party in Parliament with the largest number of seats in the Opposition but in any case not less than 30.

iii. The Government Chief Whip and his/her Deputy are charged with the responsibility of mobilizing Government backbenchers to support or op-pose Bills and Motions the Government is interested in passing or re-jecting.

iv. The Opposition Chief Whip plays the same role for the Opposition as the Government Chief Whip.

PARLIAMENTARY PARTIESThe distribution of Parliamentary seats in Kenya according to political

parties represented in the House is as follows:— NARC...........................................131— KANU.............................................68— FORD (P)........................................15— SAFINA............................................2— FORD (A).........................................2— SISI KWA SISI...................................2— SHIRIKISHO......................................1— LDP..................................................1— Ex Officio.........................................2— GRAND TOTAL......................224

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE COMMISSION

In 1999, the Constitution was amended to create a Parliamentary Service Commission which is composed of ten Members with the Speaker as Chair-man. The Leader of Government Business and the Leader of the Official Op-position Party are Members of the Commission by virtue of their position. The seven other Members of the Commission are from the backbench with four from the Government side and three from the Opposition.

The Commission is the Government of Parliament. It hires and fires the Parliamentary Service staff, looks after the welfare of Members of Parlia-ment, sets its own budget which should not be tampered with by any other authority and in discharging its responsibility is not answerable to any au-thority. The Clerk of the National Assembly is the Chief Executive Officer of

5

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

the Commission and under him there are several officers who assist him to do the work.

COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE There are basically three types of Committees in the House:

i. House Keeping Committees which are concerned with the internal ad-ministration of the House or look after the Members’ welfare. Such committees include the House Business Committee, the Powers and Privileges Committee, and the Standing Orders (or the rules) Commit-tee.

ii. Audit Committees are two, namely, the Public Accounts Committee and the Public Investments Committee, which follow up Government Minis-tries and Government owned Parastatals pursuant to the Auditor’s re-ports.

iii. Departmental Committees are eight in total. These are Committees which oversee the operations of relevant Government departments so that they conduct inquiry on Bills by inviting the Minister in charge to explain the Bill. Interested organizations and individuals may also apply to give views to the committees during deliberations on Bills or on other policy issues. These Committees are crucial because they are the only avenues open to the public to participate in legislation directly. They also serve to assist the House save a lot of time on debating Bills as most controversial issues on Bills are normally sorted out with Minis-ters during Committee hearings. The Committees also discuss policy is-sues with the respective Minister.

iv. Investigative Committees may be set up by the House under the Standing Orders to inquire into a particular matter and report to the House-after which they are dissolved. These are commonly known as ad hoc Committees.

BUSINESS IN THE HOUSEThe House sits on Tuesday from 2.30 pm to 6.30 pm; on Wednesday from

9.00 am to 12.30 pm and from 2.30 pm to 6.30 pm; and on Thursday from 2.30 pm to 6.30 pm. Every sitting is preceded by one hour Question Time when Backbenchers put Questions to Ministers. There are two types of Questions. While an ordinary Question could take up to 10 days or more be-fore it is answered, a Question by Private notice is answered within 48 hours from the time it is filed. The Questions are approved by the Speaker before they are forwarded to the Ministries concerned.

The Wednesday morning sitting is dedicated to debating Private Mem-bers’ Motions with motions sponsored by a political party given a higher pri-ority. The rest of the sitting days during the week are dedicated to Govern-ment Business.

6

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

BILLSThe majority of the Bills are introduced into the House by the Govern-

ment. A Bill must be published in the official Gazette for 14 days before its introduction into the House for First Reading, after which it is referred to the relevant Departmental Committee for discussion and consultation with the Minister in charge. This takes, by law, at least seven days.

When a Bill is read a Second Time, the Minister in charge of the Bill intro-duces debate on it and is not limited by time. The Seconder of the Bill and any other Member speaking thereafter is limited to 30 minutes except the Official Opposition spokesman on the Bill, such as the Minister, who has no time limit. After the Second Reading, a Bill proceeds to the Committee Stage when the whole House sits in Committee to examine it clause by clause and each clause including schedule(s) and the Title of the Bill are agreed upon by a majority vote.

At the Third Reading stage, the debate is a mere formality and normally takes a short while and once the question is put and agreed to, the Bill goes for publication as an Act of Parliament which is forwarded to the President for assent. If the President refuses to assent to a Bill, the House could only over-ride his veto by marshalling 65% of the total membership of the As-sembly (by vote) to reject his veto.

Such a situation has not occurred, even though in the last ten years two Bills have been by memorandum referred back by the President. Except by leave of the House, no Bill will go through more than one stage of debate at the same sitting. Should a Private Member wish to introduce a Bill to the House, it is mandatory that he would have to seek leave from the House first by Motion, requesting authority to introduce such a Bill.

Mr Marc Bosc (Canada) asked what happened about naming a Head of the Official Opposition if no political party managed to obtain the minimum 30 Members necessary.

Mr Xavier Roques (France) asked what happened if the Government no longer had a majority in Parliament: was there a right to a Dissolution and, in such cases, what happened to the President of the Republic, since he was elected by Parliament?

Mr Douglas Millar (United Kingdom) asked whether the political changes in 2002 had had an impact on parliamentary staff and wanted to know why only three Bills had been agreed to in the previous year — as against, for example, about 40 in the United Kingdom.

Mrs Halima Ahmed (Ecowas Parliament) asked how the Speaker exer-cised his power of control over the questions to Ministers and wondered how he was able to carry out this duty objectively.

7

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Mr Samuel Waweru Ndindiri first of all replied that in the circum-stances mentioned by Mr Marc Bosc there would be no Head of the Official Opposition, but simply opposition parties.

In the case raised by Mr Xavier Roques where the party in power lost its majority there would be scope for a no-confidence vote under the rules set down by the Constitution. If the Government lost that vote then the Presid-ent of the Republic would be called on to arrange for a new election.

In reply to Mr Douglas Millar, he said that the political changes which had happened in 2002 had had no impact on the career of parliamentary staff, since the legal framework which had been established in 1999 prevented the transfer of staff members to other central departments (except for clear professional incompetence).

In 2005 seven Bills had been agreed to by Parliament. This was rather a low number and there was widespread concern about this.

As far as the method of controlling questions put by elected Members to Ministers was concerned, examination of proposed questions by the Speaker was covered by Standing Order 35 of the Chamber. The Speaker usually made a considered choice between the questions which were put forward.

Mr Ibrahim Mohammed Ibrahim (Sudan) asked whether the Minister of Justice could express a personal opinion during debates, particularly where there were manifest differences between the Government and the Opposition.

Mrs Doris Katai Katebe Mwinga (Zambia) said that in Zambia, Kenya was considered as an example to follow in relation to constitutional reform. She wanted to know what role Members of Parliament had played in the dif-ferent constitutional forums and what they had been able to achieve on the issue of the referendum.

Mr Manuel Alba Navarro (Spain) asked for details about the threshold required for a majority in parliamentary elections and wanted to know if there were provisions preventing “wandering” of elected Members between different political parties. He also asked why the Administrative Justice was ex officio a Member of Parliament.

Mrs Marie-Josée Boucher-Camara (Senegal) asked what had been the main criteria for choosing the 12 female Members of Parliament who were nominated by the President of Republic. In addition, she thought that the modest proportion of 18 women out of 224 elected Members invited fur-ther pressure on the organization to take into account specific problems re-lating to women, notwithstanding the principle of a gender sensitive ap-proach.

In Senegal a collective had been established for women Members of Par-liament which worked with the Association of Women Lawyers of Senegal, other women’s groups and the Minister for the Family. It was responsible for all the Bills affecting women’s rights.

Work had been done on the law forbidding female circumcision. A Bill was in preparation at that moment on responsibility for health expenditure on children and husbands of female civil servants as well as a draft Bill on par-ity for women in electoral lists and a draft law on delegation of paternal

8

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

power — which reflected a real problem since a constantly growing propor-tion of women found themselves in the position of head of the family.

Mr Samuel Waweru Ndindiri (Kenya) said, in response to the question put by Mr Ibrahim Mohammed Ibrahim, that the Minister of Justice, although a member of the Government, could not be dismissed except by a special body which had to set out the complaints against him. The Minister only sat in Parliament as a legal adviser and did not have the right to vote.

As far as the question put by Mrs Doris Katai Katebe Mwinga was con-cerned, a huge public consultation exercise had been organized and the conclusions of this had been presented to the Constitutional Forum of Kenya (Bomas), on which all Members of Parliament had sat. The final document with legal opinion and a revision by the Ministry of Justice had then been put to a referendum. The political parties in the Government had been divided on the policy to be adopted and so finally the “no” votes had won.

The Government had nonetheless not given up on its aims in relation to the Constitution and had recently established a Committee made up of em-inent persons in order to prepare new recommendations.

Turning to the questions put by Mrs Marie-Josée Boucher-Camara, he ac-knowledged that those women who had put themselves forward for election had only gained mediocre numbers of votes. Electors — of both sexes — tended to prefer male candidates and this explained the low proportion of women Members of Parliament.

If the constitutional changes had been agreed to, a minimum proportion of women in Parliament of 30% would have been imposed.

Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni (Morocco) wanted to know whether the Secret-ary General of the National Assembly of Kenya was elected.

Mrs Claressa Surtees (Australia) said that Mr Ian Harris, former Pres-ident of the Association, regretted that he was unable to attend because the Australian Parliament was dealing with the Annual Budget.

She asked for confirmation of the statement that only candidates who were members of political parties seemed to be able to offer themselves for election.

Mrs Jacqueline Biesheuvel-Vermeijden (Netherlands) said that there were accounts in the Dutch press of payments made to Kenyan Members of Parliament and on their Code of Conduct. She asked for details on these two points.

Mr Samuel Waweru Ndindiri turning first to the question from Mr Manuel Alba Navarro, he said that the absence of party discipline was a problem in Kenya. As far as the Minister of Justice was concerned, he was not elected Member of the National Assembly but only a legal adviser.

As far as the status and role of the Secretary General was concerned, the holder of the post was chosen by the Parliamentary Service Commission which defined his duties — he was not elected. Occasionally some Secretar-ies General stayed in their post for a long time: his predecessor had served for 15 years in that office.

Replying to Mrs Claressa Surtees, he said that it was not possible for a candidate to take his seat as an independent Member because the Constitu-

9

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

tion demanded that someone should be sponsored by a political party — this provision had been identified as one to be removed in the draft constitu-tional reform.

As far as payment to Members of Parliament was concerned and their in-tegrity, members of the National Assembly were obliged to make declara-tions about their property — and this was equally applicable to all holders of public office. Therefore, they had to make a declaration about inherited property, the property of their spouse and of their children who were over 24 years old in a document sent to the Speaker of the National Assembly. Parliamentary staff also were bound by this. These papers were not made public and any requests to make them public were refused.

Mr Austin Zvoma (Zimbabwe) wanted to know if members of the pub-lic could take part in the work of the eight departmental Committees. In ad-dition, what sort of questions could be dealt with by Committees of Inquiry which did not relate already to the area of work of the departmental Com-mittees? Was the President of the Republic required to explain any refusal to give his Assent to a Bill approved by Parliament?

Mrs Evelyn P. Panlaque (Philippines) asked what position the Speaker of the National Assembly held in the ceremonial order of precedence.

Mr Constantin Tshisuaka Kabanda (Democratic Republic of Congo) raised three questions: why were Bills published in the Official Journal; how many parliamentary staff assisted the 224 elected Members; and had the Kenyan Parliament ever been suspended since its creation, in-cluding during the period of one-party rule?

Mrs Hélène Ponceau (France) wanted confirmation that all the ele-ments which defined the material status of Members of Parliament (pay, transport etc) were within the power of the Parliamentary Service Commis-sion. In the French Parliament a Commission of three Members of Parliament was specifically designated to deal with these matters — the Bureau dealt with the most important of questions relating to such matters.

Mrs Marie-Françoise Pucetti (Gabon) wanted to know who was a member of the Bureau of the National Assembly of Kenya and what the powers were of the First Deputy Speaker.

Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini (Indonesia) wanted to have details on the budgetary power of Parliament: how was the State Budget scrutinized in Kenya? In addition, how many sittings there were per year and what happened in the intervals between the sittings?

Mr Ravi Kant Chopra (India) said that Mr Yogendra Narain regretted not being able to be present that day. He wanted to know what basis the choice of the 12 nominated members was made. Could they, in addition, take part in the work of Parliament in the same way as Members who had been elected?

Mrs Aishatou Dan Nana (Niger) asked for details on the participation of illiterate Members of Parliament in the sittings of Parliament. She wanted to know what the House provided for such Members in order to engage them in the work.

10

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Mr G. Maluke (Lesotho) asked about the particularly low number of Bills agreed to.

Mr Samuel Waweru Ndindiri dealing with the question raised by Mr Austin Zvoma, said that the public was able to take part in discussions in Committees. The way in which Committees of Inquiry and Standing Commit-tees worked together could be illustrated by a concrete example: in the middle of the 1970s eight Members of Parliament had been found murdered and members of the Government were suspected of being involved. An ad hoc Committee was set up to examine the facts and make recommendations to the Government. On the point relating to whether the President was ex-pected to explain the refusal to give his Assent to a Bill agreed to by Parlia-ment, the President had to present reasons for his decision.

Turning to the question put by Mrs Evelyn P. Panlaque, he said that the Speaker was the third person in precedence in the State.

In reply to Mr Constantin Tshisuaka Kabanda, he said that the Official Journal was a public document which allowed members of the public to know about the existence and content of Bills. About 400 people worked in the Kenyan Parliament which had never been suspended since the re-estab-lishment of a multi-party system.

Dealing with Mrs Hélène Ponceau’s question he said that the Parliament-ary Service Commission dealt with all administrative questions. Pay was dealt with by a different procedure which involved scrutiny by a specialized organization and the adoption of an ad hoc law. Disciplinary questions were a matter for the Committee on Powers and Privileges which decided on mat-ters of possible breaches of good behaviour. The Committee would propose, where necessary, sanctions to the Plenary Assembly.

He said that the Bureau was made up of the Speaker, Deputy Speaker and three Assistants.

In reply to Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini, he said that the State Budget had to be presented to Parliament on the 20th of June each year. Previously, the Committee on Finance had a habit of calling the relevant minister for a gen-eral discussion on questions relating to the budget. The Assembly had 20 days to debate the Government’s proposals. The Assembly could not pro-pose an increase in expenditure but only cuts.

As far as Members nominated to Parliament were concerned, the Electoral Commission simply had to ensure that they had the same qualifications as an ordinary Member of Parliament.

In reply to Mrs Aishatou Dan Nana he said that candidates for election had to be literate and comply with a certain number of conditions. For this reason no seat in Parliament was held by an illiterate Member.

Turning finally to Mr G. Maluke he admitted that the number of Bills agreed to was modest — some thinking was being done about the way of remedying this situation, for example by lengthening the sittings and in-creasing their number.

11

PARLIAMENTARY CODES OF ETHICS:RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CANADA

—

Marc BOSCDeputy Secretary General of the House of Commons (Canada)

1. PARLIAMENTARY ETHICS1

While society expects that individuals should be as free as possible to pursue their private goals, parliamentarians are predominantly in the public eye, and their actions, values and ethical conduct send a signal as to the norms of acceptable behaviour. As a result, parliamentarians must set an example by upholding the highest standards of ethical conduct. Parliaments must therefore strike a balance between protecting private interests and en-suring that those in positions of public trust should not act in their public ca-pacity on matters in which they have an apparent personal interest, whether it is real or only perceived.

The political ethics regime in Canada has changed a great deal over the last ten years. Ten years ago, conflict of interest and ethics matters were ad-ministered by the Office of the Ethics Counsellor, from within a government department. The Ethics Counsellor was a member of the Public Service2 and reported to the Prime Minister. Government guidelines of ethical conduct for Ministers of the Crown, and Ministers of state, and regarding political fun-draising, were not available to the public. What is more, these guidelines did not apply to Members of Parliament. In contrast, Parliament today has chosen to adopt clear and comprehensive rules to guide Members of Parlia-ment and to engender and maintain trust in elected and public officials.

1. Young, M. “Conflict-of-Interest Rules for Federal Legislators”. Library of Parlia-ment, Ottawa, 2003.

2. Former Assistant Deputy Registrar of Canada Howard Wilson was appointed Ethics Counsellor in 1994. The Office of the Ethics Counsellor was established within Industry Canada.

Until 2004, Parliament had not yet passed conflict of interest legislation to consolidate the rules on conflict of interest and codes of conduct for parlia-mentarians. Rather, existing provisions were to be found in the Parliament of Canada Act, the Criminal Code of Canada and in other laws, as well as in the Rules of the Senate and the Standing Orders of the House of Commons. Many of these provisions were antiquated and dealt only with specific situ-ations. It was generally recognized that more up-to-date and relevant rules were required, both to guide parliamentarians and to assure the Canadian public that high standards of conduct applied.

On 31 March 2004, Bill C-4 received Royal Assent, and paved the way for Canada’s parliamentary codes of ethics. Bill C-4 was the culmination of some thirty years of efforts from the Senate and the House of Commons and their several parliamentary committees. The resulting codes of ethics came about from no small measure of political and public pressure to solidify Par-liament’s position on a code of ethical standards for Members of the Senate and House of Commons.

The description of the “roots” of the current system of parliamentary eth-ics in Canada would require a 30-year chronology, but the current legislation was more or less ten years in the making. What follows is a historical sum-mary of steps taken to develop a parliamentary ethics code, and a descrip-tion of recent developments in the House of Commons. A brief overview of the Senate experience is presented to highlight some of the differences in the codes of ethics, which are born of the same statute but were developed independently by the two Houses of Parliament.

1.1 Origins of the Conflict of Interest Code: The Milliken-Oliver Report

In 1996, both the Senate and the House of Commons established the Spe-cial Joint Committee on a Code of Conduct. Co-Chaired by Member of Parlia-ment Peter Milliken and Senator Donald Oliver, the Committee was directed to consult broadly, review best practices, and develop a code of conduct to guide Senators and Members of the House in reconciling their official re-sponsibilities with their personal interests.

In 1997, after an extensive process of consideration, discussion and hear-ing of witness testimony, the Committee published its Second Report – com-monly referred to as the Milliken-Oliver Report – which proposed a Code of Official Conduct as a strong and fair response to the need for clear rules. Dissolution intervened and no action was taken on the proposed code.

In 2002, at a time when the general issue of ethics was very much in the daily news, Prime Minister Chrétien announced an Eight-Point Plan of Action on government ethics, which called on Senators and Members of Parliament to support a code of conduct inspired by the 1997 Milliken-Oliver Report. That same year, a parliamentary ethics initiative was tabled in draft form in both chambers of Parliament.

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

1.2 The Eight-Point Plan of ActionThe Plan of Action broadly outlined an initiative to strengthen and shore-

up ethics throughout Parliament, the Cabinet and the public service. The guide for Ministers of the Crown and Ministers of State, which had existed since 1993 and outlined the guiding standards of ethical conduct, was to be made public, as were the guidelines governing ministerial fundraising for political purposes. The Government also proposed fundamental changes to the legislation governing the financing of political parties and candidates for office. These sought to establish rules and procedures to ensure that such fundraising caused no real or apparent conflicts of interest.

In addition, the Government released revised rules for ministerial dealings with crown corporations. These rules clarified the relationship between Min-isters, Members of Parliament, and crown corporations when dealing with constituency matters.

At the same time, the Prime Minister tabled the first annual report of the Ethics Counsellor in Parliament on the range of his duties and activities. Fur-thermore, the Ethics Counsellor was made available to a parliamentary com-mittee in order to be examined on his report.

In consultation with the opposition parties, and drawing inspiration from the Milliken-Oliver report, the Government also sought to proceed with a stand-alone code of conduct for Members of Parliament and Senators, as well as with changes to the Lobbyists Registration Act to enhance clarity, transparency and enforcement.

Lastly, the Government promised to introduce measures to strengthen the ability and responsibility of senior public servants to exercise propriety and due diligence in the management of public funds.

In April 2003, the Government introduced Bill C-34 in the House of Com-mons. The Bill, aimed at amending the Parliament of Canada Act, and other Acts in consequence, sought to establish the office of the Senate Ethics Of-ficer and of the House of Commons Ethics Commissioner. These positions were to be new and unique positions in Canadian law. When acting in rela-tion to parliamentarians and applying relevant codes of conduct, their activ-ities would not be subject to judicial review. While founded in statute, the duties and functions of Senate Ethics Officer and House of Commons Ethics Commissioner were to be determined by their respective chambers of Parlia-ment, and they would enjoy the privileges and immunities of Parliament and its Members when carrying out those duties and functions.

Eventually, in the spring of 2004, the legislation received Royal Assent. As a result, Parliament, now has three key documents on ethics and conflicts of interest: the Conflict of Interest Code for Senators, administered by the Of-fice of the Senate Ethics Officer; the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, and the Conflict of Interest and Post-employment Code for Public Office Holders, which are both administered by the Office of the Ethics Commissioner.

At roughly the same time, a House of Commons Ethics Commissioner was appointed.

15

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

1.3 The Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons

The purposes of the Conflict of Interest Code are: to maintain and en-hance public confidence and trust in the integrity of Members as well as the respect and confidence that society places in the House of Commons as an institution; to demonstrate to the public that Members are held to standards that place the public interest ahead of their private interests and to provide a transparent system by which the public may judge this to be the case; to provide for greater certainty and guidance for Members on how to reconcile their private interests with their public duties and functions; and to foster consensus among Members by establishing common standards and by providing the means by which questions relating to proper conduct may be answered by an independent, non-partisan adviser.

The Code establishes a regime and provides guidance and assistance to Members of the House, while assuring the public that allegations are invest-igated, and breaches dealt with. It also requires confidential disclosure of the financial affairs of all parliamentarians, their spouses and dependants. In addition, there are rules on the receipt of gifts, personal benefits and sponsored travel, as well as rules regarding the improper uses of influence, insider information and furthering private interests. Finally, it calls for the Ethics Commissioner, under the direction of a parliamentary committee, to receive submissions of disclosure, to advise on matters related to the Code of Conduct, and to investigate complaints.

The Conflict of Interest Code is based on the principle that service in Par-liament is a public trust, and the House of Commons should recognize and declare the expectations of Members with respect to the ethical discharge of their duties.

1.4 The House of Commons Ethics Commissioner 1

The Ethics Commissioner is appointed to perform the duties and functions assigned by the House of Commons regarding the conduct of its Members, and to administer any ethical principles, rules or obligations established by the Prime Minister for public office holders. Therefore, the mandate of the Ethics Commissioner is two-fold: to administer the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, and to administer the Conflict of In-terest and Post-employment Code for Public Office Holders, commonly known as the Prime Minister's Code. Public office holders, including Ministers of the Crown, Ministers of State and Parliamentary Secretaries, are respons-ible to the Prime Minister, and it is the Office of the Prime Minister that re-vises this Code.

The Ethics Commissioner is appointed by the Governor in Council, after consultation with the leader of every recognized party in the House of Com-mons, and after approval of the appointment by resolution of the House. He holds office for a term of five years and may only be removed for cause by the Governor in Council on address of the House of Commons. He may be re-appointed for one or more terms of up to five years each.

1. Office of the Ethics Commissioner, 2006. http://www.parl.gc.ca/oec/en/

16

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Dr. Bernard J. Shapiro, Principal and Vice-Chancellor Emeritus of McGill University became the first Ethics Commissioner of Canada on 17 May 2004, by Order in Council Appointment.

In fulfilling his mandate, the Ethics Commissioner provides confidential opinions and advice to Members of the House of Commons, and to public office holders, on any matter respecting their obligations under the Code to which they are subject. Further, he conducts inquiries on questions of com-pliance with either Code, as applicable. A Member who has reasonable grounds to believe that another Member has not complied with his or her obligations under the Conflict of Interest Code for Members may request that the Ethics Commissioner conduct an inquiry into the matter. In addition, the House may, by way of resolution, direct the Ethics Commissioner to con-duct an inquiry to determine whether a Member has complied with his or her obligations under this Code. The Ethics Commissioner may also, on his own initiative, and on giving the Member concerned reasonable written notice, conduct an inquiry to determine whether the Member has complied with his or her obligations under this Code.

A Member of the Senate or House of Commons who has reasonable grounds to believe that a Minister of the Crown, a Minister of state or a Par-liamentary Secretary has not observed the ethical principles, rules or obliga-tions established by the Prime Minister for public holders office may, in writ-ing, request that the Ethics Commissioner examine the matter. In dischar-ging these duties, the Office may also undertake educational initiatives and information activities in order to inform its clients, and the public at large.

The Ethics Commissioner is also charged with administering the Public Re-gistry for Members of Parliament and for public office holders, including Min-isters of the Crown, Ministers of State and Parliamentary Secretaries. The Public Registry is a summary public record of required confidential disclosure statements.

The Disclosure Statement is the initial document which a Member of the House must complete and file with the Office of the Ethics Commissioner. The Member is requested to disclose his or her private interests as well as those of his or her spouse and dependent children. Members are required to submit the Disclosure Statement within 60 days notice of their election to the House of Commons. Once filed with the Office of the Ethics Commis-sioner, the Statement is a confidential document. Public office holders are also required to submit a Statement, disclosing their personal financial in-terests and those of their family members, to the Ethics Commissioner within 60 days after their appointment. Public office holders must declare their assets, liabilities, outside activities and declarable gifts, and must di-vest their controlled assets within 120 days after their appointment. This in-formation must cover the 12-month period before assuming public office, as well as the income they are entitled to receive during the following 12 months. Both Members and public office holders must report any mater-ial change in this information to the Ethics Commissioner within 30 days.

Any Member with reasonable grounds to believe that they or a member of their family have a private interest that might be affected by a matter that is before the House of Commons or a committee on which the Member sits must, if present during consideration of the matter, disclose the general

17

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

nature of the private interest at the first opportunity. If a Member becomes aware at a later date of a private interest that should have been disclosed, the Member must make the required disclosure immediately. Members may not participate in debate on or vote on a question in which they have a private interest.

Regarding inquiries, the two Conflict of Interest Codes require a threshold determination on the part of the Ethics Commissioner. Inquiries concerning private Members of Parliament are handled under the Conflict of Interest Code for Members. However, when the Ethics Commissioner begins an in-quiry concerning a Minister or Parliamentary Secretary, he must determine whether the individual was acting in a ministerial capacity, or in the capacity of a Parliamentary Secretary. If so, the inquiry is dealt with under the Prime Minister’s Code. Otherwise, inquiries of Ministers and Parliamentary Secret-aries are dealt with as with private Members.

When conducting an inquiry with respect to Members, the Ethics Commis-sioner may arrive at one of three conclusions: either that there is no contra-vention of the rules, a mitigated contravention of the rules, or an unmitig-ated contravention of the rules. A mitigated contravention implies that a Member has not complied with an obligation under the Code, but that the Member has taken all reasonable measures to prevent the non-compliance, or that the non-compliance is trivial or occurred through inadvertence or an error in judgment made in good faith.

Where the finding concludes that a Member is not in compliance with the Code, the Ethics Commissioner may recommend that sanctions be imposed. The Code is silent on the exact nature of possible sanctions, and the Ethics Commissioner does not implement or enforce any recommended sanctions. Rather, the House of Commons addresses the recommendations by debat-ing motions to concur in or motions respecting the Ethics Commissioner’s reports.

With respect to public office holders and the Prime Minister’s Code, there is no requirement for the Ethics Commissioner to recommend any sanction. Where the Ethics Commissioner finds that a public office holder is not in compliance with the Code, the public office holder is subject to such appro-priate measures as may be determined by the Prime Minister, including, where applicable, discharge or termination of appointment.

Reports relating to the application of the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons are provided to the Speaker of the House who in turn tables them in the House. Reports on cases with respect to the Prime Minister’s Conflict of Interest and Post-employment Code for Public Office Holders are referred to the Prime Minister. Findings by the Eth-ics Commissioner are final and may not be altered.

The Ethics Commissioner is an independent Officer of Parliament and car-ries out his duties and functions under the general direction of any commit-tee of the House of Commons that may be designated or established by that House for that purpose. In late 2004, separate meetings were held between the Ethics Commissioner and both the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, and the Standing Committee on Access to Information,

18

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Privacy and Ethics, to confirm how the House would manage the matter of parliamentary oversight.

The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs reviews and ap-proves the Ethics Commissioner’s “Rules for the Administration of the Code” for Members, and is responsible for all matters relating to the Code, includ-ing a review of the Code itself after five years. In addition, the Committee reviews the annual reports of the Ethics Commissioner on activities in rela-tion to Members of the House of Commons. The Standing Committee on Ac-cess to Information, Privacy and Ethics is responsible for the operation and management of the Office of the Ethics Commissioner, as well as the annual reports of the Ethics Commissioner on activities in relation to public office holders.

2.0 RECENT EXPERIENCESThe Ethics Commissioner published his first Annual Reports both for Mem-

bers of the House of Commons, and for Public Office Holders on 30 June 2005. He also published Issues and Challenges, a document intended as a supplement to the two Annual Reports, which addresses a number of con-ceptual and procedural challenges that have arisen during the first year of operations of the Office of the Ethics Commissioner.

Since the Conflict of Interest Code for Members was adopted in April 2004, the Ethics Commissioner has published three Inquiry Reports on Mem-bers of the House of Commons, and one Inquiry Report on a public office holder. The full reports are public, and each includes the legislative back-ground, relevant facts, and a comprehensive chronology of events of the in-quiry.

In all cases, the Ethics Commissioner concluded that none of the Mem-bers, who were subjects of inquiry, contravened the Conflict of Interest Code. However, in one case regarding the surreptitious audio taping of a conversation between two Members, the Ethics Commissioner commented that this action was extremely inappropriate, and that the facts of this case clearly had not enhanced the public’s confidence and trust in the integrity of the House of Commons and its Members.

In another case, a Member of Parliament rose in the House on a question of privilege and alleged that the Ethics Commissioner was in breach of the Conflict of Interest Code. The Member charged that the Ethics Commissioner had not followed the proper processes for conducting an inquiry. In addition, the Member complained that the Ethics Commissioner did not give the re-quired written notice of the investigation and charges, contrary to the Code. The Speaker ruled that neither the Parliament of Canada Act nor the Code provided a protocol for the resolution of complaints by Members against the Ethics Commissioner in respect of the discharge of his mandate. The Speaker nevertheless felt that the allegations were troubling enough to war-rant further investigation and found a prima facie question of privilege.

The matter was referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, which found the Ethics Commissioner in contempt of the House of Commons, in addition to raising questions about competence. Un-

19

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

der the circumstances, however, it did not recommend any sanctions or penalty.

Most recently, the Ethics Commissioner launched inquiries of Prime Minis-ter Stephen Harper and Minister of International Trade, David Emerson to determine whether they contravened the rules of conduct set out in the Conflict of Interest Code.

Three opposition Members of Parliament alleged that Prime Minister Harper offered an inducement to the Honourable David Emerson, a newly re-elected Liberal Member of Parliament, to join the Cabinet of the new Con-servative Government. The Ethics Commissioner concluded from the prelim-inary inquiry that neither the Prime Minister nor the Minister of International Trade contravened any of the specific sections of the Members’ Code, and found no reasons to further pursue the matter. Clearly, the rules of conduct are still new for Members, as well as for the Ethics Commissioner, and the landscape of parliamentary ethics is still being formed.

Indeed, just a few short weeks ago, the new Conservative Government in-troduced an Accountability Act as its first piece of legislation. The bill covers a number of areas, such as placing further limits on political donations, giv-ing greater protection to whistleblowers in the public service and strength-ening the powers of Officers of Parliament. The bill would also enshrine in le-gislation the provisions of the Conflict of Interest and Post-employment Code for Public Office Holders and combine the offices of Ethics Commissioner and Senate Ethics Officer into the new position of Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. The outcome of these proposed reforms remains to be seen.

3.0 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE SENATE OF CANADA1

The Senate and the House of Commons share a common statute on par-liamentary ethics. However, each chamber has independently developed their Conflict of Interest Codes and appointed separate officers to administer them.

Mr. Jean T. Fournier was appointed the Senate’s first Ethics Officer follow-ing the adoption of a motion to that effect by the Senate on 24 February 2005. The Senate of Canada adopted the Code of Ethics for Senators on 18 May 2005.

The Code requires each Senator to submit to the Senate Ethics Officer an annual confidential disclosure statement listing sources of income, assets, li-abilities, government contracts, financial and other interests. The Senate Ethics Officer reviews the information, advises individual Senators on pos-sible conflicts and recommends compliance measures. A public disclosure summary is also prepared by the Office based on the information provided by each Senator. In accordance with its terms, the Code’s section on disclos-ure came into force 120 days after the Code was adopted. In addition, the Code provided that confidential Disclosure Statements were due 120 days after the adoption of the Code. New Senators have 120 days from their date

1. Office of the Senate Ethics Officer, 2006. http://sen.parl.gc.ca/seo-cse/

20

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

of appointment to provide Disclosure Statements to the Senate Ethics Of-ficer.

The Code allows each Senator to seek the advice of the Senate Ethics Officer on any matter respecting the Senator’s obligations under the Code. While unofficial advice may be given on ordinary or routine matters, the nor-mal practice is to provide written advice. This not only ensures clarity as to the content of the advice, it may enable a Senator to demonstrate that he or she sought and followed the advice of the Senate Ethics Officer. The opinion given is confidential and can only be released by the Senator or with his or her consent.

Under the Code, an inquiry may be conducted to determine whether a Senator has complied with his or her obligations. The Senate Ethics Officer may conduct such inquiries at the request of a Senator, the Committee es-tablished for the purposes of the Code, or on his own initiative in accordance with the procedure set out in the Code.

The Senate Ethics Officer is an independent Officer of the Senate and car-ries out his duties under the general direction of a committee established under the Parliament of Canada Act for the purposes of the Code. He is ap-pointed for a 7 year term and may be removed for cause. The Senate Ethics Officer enjoys the privileges and immunities of the Senate and its Members when carrying out his duties and functions.

4.0 CONCLUSIONAs can be seen, parliamentary codes of ethics have evolved in the past

few years and the ethics administrative framework continues to adapt to changing political exigencies.

Still, their raison d’être remains unchanged: to engender accountability and trust in the work of Parliament, to provide independent oversight, and to clarify the expected rules of conduct. Parliamentarians, who are often very active with their communities in their private lives, can respect and appreci-ate clear guidelines on how to transition between public service and private affairs. Parliamentarians are given a vote of trust by constituents, but are expected to maintain the highest standards of ethical conduct. Parliament therefore exercises its due diligence in ensuring that appropriate ethical conduct guidelines exist and are seen to be adhered to.

AppendixChronology of Parliamentary Ethics Initiatives: 1973-20061

March 12, 1996 - The House and Senate passed motions to establish a Special Joint Committee to develop a Code of Conduct.

March 20, 1997 - The Special Joint Committee on a Code of Conduct tabled its proposed Code of Official Conduct, the Milliken-Oliver Report.

May 23, 2002 - The Prime Minister announced that the Milliken-Oliver Report would form the basis of a Code of Conduct for Members of Parlia-ment and Senators, to be developed in the fall.

1. Young, M. “Conflict-of-Interest Rules for Federal Legislators”. Library of Parlia-ment, Ottawa, 2003.

21

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

October 23, 2002 - A draft bill to establish the position of Ethics Com-missioner and a proposed Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians were tabled in Parliament.

October 1, 2003 - Bill C-34, an Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Ethics Commissioner and Senate Ethics Officer) and other Acts in consequence, passed the House of Commons.

October 30, 2003 - The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented its 25th Report to the House; it contained a proposed Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons.

November 7, 2003 - Bill C-34 was amended by the Senate at third reading and a message sent to the House to that effect.

November 12, 2003 - Parliament was prorogued and Bill C-34 died on the Order Paper.

February 10, 2004 - The former Bill C-34 was reinstated as Bill C-4, pursuant to a motion adopted by the House of Commons.

February 11, 2004 - Bill C-4 was introduced in the House and referred to the Senate that same day.

March 31, 2004 - Bill C-4 was given Royal Assent.April 29, 2004 - House of Commons adopted the Conflict of Interest

Code for Members of the House of Commons.April 29, 2004 - House of Commons approved the appointment of Dr.

Bernard Shapiro as Ethics Commissioner.

Selected References

Parliament. Bill C-4: An Act to Amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Ethics Commissioner and Senate Ethics Officer) and Other Acts in Con-sequence. Ottawa, 2004.

Senate of Canada. Standing Senate Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament, 3rd Report on a Conflict of Interest Code. 2005.

House of Commons, Standing Committee on Procedure and House Af-fairs, Reports 24 and 25, 37th Parliament, 2nd Session; and Report 20, 38th Parliament, 1st Session.

Office of the Prime Minister. Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment Code for Public Office Holders. Ottawa. 2004.

Parliament. The Special Joint Committee on a Code of Conduct of the Senate and the House of Commons. Second Report (the Milliken-Oliver Report). Ottawa, March 1997.

Parliament. Report of the Special Joint Committee on Conflict of In-terests. Ottawa, 1992.

Task Force on Conflict of Interest. Ethical Conduct in the Public Sector. Report. Michael Starr and Mitchell Sharp, Co-Chairmen. Ottawa, 1984.

Young, Margaret. Bill C-34: An Act to Amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Ethics Commissioner and Senate Ethics Officer) and Other Acts in Consequence. Legislative Summary 454E. Parliamentary Research Branch, Library of Parliament, Ottawa, June 2003.

Office of the Senate Ethics Officer. “About Us.” 2006.http://sen.parl.gc.ca/seo-cse/Office of the Ethics Commissioner. “Mandate Role and Responsibilit-

ies.” 2006.http://www.parl.gc.ca/oec/en/

22

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Mrs Claressa Surtees (Australia) said that in Australia, Parliament did not have an Ethics Commissioner but that there was a Register of Members Interests which anyone could look at and check. She asked whether the press in Canada had access to the corresponding register and, if so, with what restrictions.

Mrs Doris Katai Katebe Mwinga (Zambia) asked what the basis was for the choice of the Commissioner. As far as relatives were concerned, the Code of Ethics applicable at the moment in Zambia provided that close rel-atives such as spouses or children were not required to make a declaration. It was a lively debate at the moment on a possible extension to such people of the obligation to declare.

Mrs Adelina de Sá Carvalho (Portugal) said that in Portugal there was an Ethics Committee made up only of Members of Parliament and that there had been a debate on the possibility of bringing in outside people to join it.

In addition, she was struck by the fact that the relative provisions were based on a Bill put forward by the Government. This would be inconceivable in Portugal where it was considered that anything to do with the status of Members of Parliament was a matter for Parliament alone. She asked on what basis the Government had intervened in this area.

She also wanted to put two practical questions: in Canada how was the membership of Members of Parliament of an association of lawyers ap-proached: was this registerable? In addition, if the national airline company invited Canadian Members of Parliament to visit a country which it served and with which it was planning to sign a large contract, did this invitation have to figure in the Register, which could be consulted by the public?

Mr Hafnaoui Amrani (Algeria) said that there was no Ethics Committee in Algeria and Members of Parliament were simply required to produce a de-claration of property at the start and at the end of their mandate.

He asked a series of questions: why were there different Commissioners relating to Ministers, the House of Commons and the Senate; did Members of Parliament have to make a declaration at the end of their term; what were the powers of the Commissioner and what would happen if anybody made a false declaration; if a citizen suspected misbehaviour on the part of a Member of Parliament could he choose whether to raise this with the Com-missioner or the prosecuting authorities?

Mr Marc Bosc (Canada) replying first to Mrs Claressa Surtees said that the content of declarations of Members and their close family was confiden-tial. Because of the professional interests of certain spouses and the fact that that might sometimes involve confidential information, it had been thought better to rely on the judgement of the Commissioner whose opinion was usually accepted.

In reply to Mrs Doris Katai Katebe Mwinga, he emphasized that although the Government formally nominated the Commissioner it was nonetheless required for the Leaders of the Opposition to be consulted about the various candidates. A vote took place in the House which allowed final confirmation

23

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

of the chosen candidate. Once he was appointed, the Commissioner could not be relieved of his duties except by the Members of Parliament them-selves and on the basis of explicit reasons.

Turning to Mrs Adelina de Sá Carvalho, he said that in Canada for a long time there had been a House Business Committee or a Privilege and Elec-tions Committee which had never worked as a proper Ethics Committee. Its duty had in the main been to revise from time to time the Code of Conduct. The limitations of this system had created an image problem with the public and journalists in particular had criticised the fiction of parliamentary over-sight. It was for this reason that the deliberate choice had been made to choose a non Parliamentary Commissioner.

Initiative for reform came from the Government because the Commis-sioner had two roles — at the same time he dealt with Ministers and Civil Servants on the one hand and Members of Parliament on the other — apply-ing different rules and procedures in either case.

There was no formal rule against the participation of a Member of Parlia-ment in an organization for lawyers. If such an organization had a particular interest in a contract with the Government he nonetheless had to withdraw from it and inform the Ethics Commissioner.

As far as a trip by a Member of Parliament with Air Canada was con-cerned, naturally this would have to be declared because it would not be paid for either by the Government or by Parliament.

In reply to Mr Hafnaoui Amrani, he referred to the double function of the Commissioner and the provision in the Code which required the Commis-sioner to be informed if there was any material change in the situation of a Member of Parliament whatever it might be.

If the Commissioner thought that the Code had been broken then he made a report to the House which had to debate it. This had never happened so far — the scale of punishments which could be applied in-cluded the possibility of expulsion of a Member of Parliament.

Mr Constantin Tshisuaka Kabanda (Democratic Republic of Congo) emphasized the importance of such a Code. In the Congo, where such a Code did not exist, the parties had agreed to a division between themselves of the official duties within Parliament.

A Code would allow the reintroduction of a certain discipline and would do much to improve the credit of the House and its Members.

Mr Ulrich Schöler (Germany) referred to the situation in Germany where there had been a scandal several years previously relating to parlia-mentary visits and frequent-flier benefits set up by airline companies. Mem-bers of Parliament who travelled in the course of their duties had been able to collect air miles which they had then used for their private benefit. As a result of the scandal several Members of Parliament who were very promin-ent had been forced to resign.

Lufthansa had originally refused to return the air miles to the parliament-ary administration because they had been personally allocated to the holder of the card and not to the institution. It was necessary to force it to do so which allowed air miles to be used for various official delegation visits.

24

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Mrs Stavroula Vassilouni (Greece) said that there was no Ethics Code as such in the Greek Parliament but that there was a collection of rules — some of them in the constitution — which regulated the behaviour of Mem-bers of Parliament. Under these rules they had to make an annual declara-tion of their personal property and that of their close family and once elec-ted, they had to give up any other line of work (lawyer, doctor etc).

She asked whether electoral costs and expenditure had been limited in Canada and by what means they were controlled.

Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini (Indonesia) asked about the disciplinary sanctions which might be taken against Members of Parliament who broke the Code and what political parties might do about inappropriate behaviour on the part of one of their members.

Mr Douglas Millar (United Kingdom) wondered what judgement should be made about the system in Canada. For example, he wondered whether there was a risk that parties would use the Code to embarrass their opponents and get political advantage. In the United Kingdom the House of Commons was sovereign when dealing with the behaviour of its Members — apart from cases where the criminal law was broken. He asked whether the Canadian courts would take notice of the Code and apply it directly.

In the United Kingdom, the Committee on Standards and Privileges some-times had complained about the lack of cooperation on the part of Members of the House judged guilty as a result of its inquiries. He asked whether sim-ilar difficulties had been met in Canada.

Mr Mamadou Santara (Mali) said that there was no system of ethics in Mali and that there had been some resultant difficulties: for example, there were no rules against “political nomadism” — in other words changing polit-ical affiliation after an election.

He asked for details about the relationship between the Ethics Commis-sioner, who was nominated by the Government, and the Parliamentary Com-mittee which applied to the Ethics Code, which was, of course, a parliament-ary organization.

In addition, did a Member of Parliament who had been accused have the opportunity to defend himself — how was the principle of right of reply re-spected? Did a Member of Parliament have the possibility of appeal against a punishment imposed on him?

Mrs Jacqueline Biesheuvel-Vermeijden (Netherlands) said that in the Netherlands there were three Registers: a Register of Members’ In-terests, where they had to indicate all their outside interests and income which they obtained; a Register of foreign visits on the basis of invitation by a third party; a Register of gifts received in the case where the value was over €50. These three Registers were open to the public and made access-ible on the Internet. She asked were similar arrangements in place in Canada?

She thought the publication of such information on the Internet was the best possible way of obtaining scrutiny and control.

Mr Marc Bosc replying first to Mr Ulrich Schöler, said that the Canadian airlines had also, for many years, refused to turn over their air miles to the

25

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

institution. If such air miles were used then they should in principle be de-clared to the tax authorities as a benefit in kind. In addition, any scrutiny seemed impossible since such points might be transferable to a third-party.

Turning to Mrs Stavroula Vassilouni, he said that electoral expenses in Canada were subject to statutory provisions which placed a strict ceiling on gifts and expenses. Individual gifts were limited to $1,000 per person. The parties were financed in proportion to the number of votes received on the basis of $1.75 per vote.

In reply to Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini, he said that the absence of any expli-cit mention of punishment in the Code meant that the Commissioner had to propose sanctions in relation to the gravity of the offence. As far as political parties were concerned, they usually waited to the end of the inquiry before they decided unless the facts alleged seemed absolutely clear and particu-larly serious.

In response to Mr Douglas Millar, he agreed that there was a risk that the Code might be misused. The legal advisers in Parliament nonetheless thought that the Code was a sufficiently solid basis for protecting the Com-missioner.

In reply to Mr Mamadou Santara, he said that the relationship between the Commission and the Parliamentary Committee was rather strained at the moment, since the former doubted the technical competence of the lat-ter. A Member of Parliament who was accused could explain himself in the House but it was the House which decided the punishment and that decision was without any appeal.

Turning finally to the remarks of Mrs Jacqueline Biesheuvel-Vermeijden, he said that in Canada the Register of trips was public. On the other hand, the Register of gifts was not made public and such gifts were limited to those over $200.

26

THE FUNCTIONING OF THE INSTITUTEOF URGENCY IN THE CHILEAN

PARLIAMENT

—

Carlos Hoffmann-ContrerasSecretary General of the Senate (Chile)

First, and in order to illustrate the subject, allow me to briefly present its historical context. Towards the end of the XIX century Chile underwent a dramatic change in its type of government, from a presidential regime with authoritarian features to a so called “parliamentarian” one, that actually could be defined as assembly or convention driven. This regime was charac-terized by the fact that the centre of power resided in Parliament rather than in the Executive, which became subordinated to the former. This brought about the waning of the figure of the President of the Republic as supreme institution of the State, as well as his loss of any capacity to effectively inter-vene before Parliament in the direction of government affairs. Historians have designated this period as “the Parliamentary Republic”.

Renowned jurists and historians, such as Prof. Alejandro Silva Bascuñan, consider that this historical context “convinced large sectors of public opin-ion that Congress delayed the process of lawmaking, and that, in order to avoid this, a way needed to be found that allowed to accelerate the passing of laws whenever national interest required it”.

Evidently, it is neither convenient to adopt legislation under excessive pressure, bringing about its lacking in solid socio-judicial foundations, nor to indefinitely delay legal solutions to collective problems by not addressing them in a timely manner and with effective political will.

The protracted delay in the lawmaking process was, in fact, the main fea-ture of that period, and brought about an institutional crisis that resulted in the drafting of a new Constitution in 1925.

To remedy the above deficiency the Constitution of 1925 introduced into the Chilean judicial system an institution called the POWER OF URGENCY. Originally this authority meant that the President of the Republic was em-powered to submit, to any one of the Chambers of Parliament, a bill desig-nated as urgent, and that the respective Chamber had to deliver a pro-nouncement within a peremptory term, which was originally set at thirty days.

The present Constitution of the Republic of Chile (1980), maintains both the authority and the time limit, while establishing that the President of the Republic may invoke before either Chamber, and regarding one or all stages, the urgency of a given bill of law. The concept of “stage” refers to each one of the stages of the bill in Parliament up to the passing into law by the National Congress, as well as to the observations made by the Head of State. Furthermore, the regulation regarding the marking of urgency is in-cluded in the Rules of the National Congress, as we shall detail below.

The exclusive powers granted to the Head of State to declare the urgency of any legislative initiative are in harmony with the unification of the execut-ive and administrative functions entrusted to the President of the Republic by the Constitution. According to the vision of the constituents of 1980 this unity could be weakened if the petition of urgency originated in Parliament instead of in the person holding the highest responsibility of government, in whom the direction of the State is centred.

The President of the Republic may declare the urgent nature of a bill in the corresponding Message — the name of the document by which a bill of law is presented to Congress — or by official communication addressed to the President of the Chamber that received it. Any bill, regardless of content or nature, may be declared urgent, including projects involving constitu-tional reform.

According to the Constitution presently in force there are degrees of ur-gency, and the choice of degree resides with the President of the Republic. However, this matter has not been a constant in Chilean law as, according to the previous Constitution (1925), the power to declare the degree of the urgency resided in Parliament, as the constituents considered it inherent to legislative autonomy.

The section of the Rules of the National Congress in which this institution is contemplated establishes that urgency can be: a) simple, b) highest, or c) for immediate discussion. When a bill is declared of “simple urgency” its dis-cussion and voting in any Chamber must be concluded within thirty days; if declared of “highest urgency” within ten days; and if declared “for immedi-ate discussion” within three days.

To synthesize, both the authority to declare the urgency and the choice of the degree of urgency reside with the President of the Republic. It should be added that since the constituents did not place limits on the use of this power on the part of the President, he could request it simultaneously for any number of bills and therefore, theoretically speaking, it would be pos-sible for a Chamber to be required to deal with several bills with the same constitutional time limit. This strengthens the power of the President to im-

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

pose his legislative policies and, in fact, could allow him to control the schedule of functioning of Parliament.

With this in mind and to conclude this exposition, we believe it fitting to add some considerations to this institute, enshrined in the Chilean Constitu-tion. Historians and jurists observed that the abuse in resorting to urgency combined with the scope of the legal matters in which the President has ex-clusive initiative (quite extensive in Chile) could result in diminishing Parlia-ment’s essence, namely its co-legislative potential which, furthermore, is its reason to exist.

In practical terms, the experience of Chilean legislatures during the last 16 years – from the reopening of Parliament in 1990 to this day – bears wit-ness to the fact that the capacity to forge political agreement and under-standing between representatives of the Executive and Members of Parlia-ment, both from the majority and from the opposition, has enabled a ra-tional use of this power by the President, to the point of his withdrawing the declaration of urgency when the time limits hinder an adequate negotiation, and reinstating it when circumstances are deemed adequate for the ap-proval of a given bill of law. This capacity to conduct a dialogue has made it possible to preserve the value of the institute of urgency without detracting from it, which would generate a considerable unbalance of power that might hinder a healthy and consolidated parliamentary institutionality.

Mr Anders Forsberg, President, asked what would happen if Parlia-ment did not have the same judgment as the President of the Republic about the degree of urgency of a Bill.

Mr Carlos Hoffmann-Contreras replied that under the system set down by the Constitution of 1925, the degree of urgency was effectively a matter for Parliament to judge.

The current Constitution, which had been prepared by a military Govern-ment, was particularly presidential. Therefore, the President decided and Parliament was bound by his decision. In case of disagreement, Parliament could only give way, even though it could let it be known that it was un-happy with the time limits imposed on it.

Mrs Georgeta Elisabeta Ionescu (Romania) asked what percentage of Bills were debated under the urgent procedure. Were drafts normally ex-amined by the relevant Standing Committee, by a special Committee or just sent directly to the Chamber for debate and agreement? Did the use of the urgent procedure not reduce parliamentary debate to being of peripheral importance, indeed being purely symbolic?

Mr Michael Pownall (United Kingdom) said that the British Parliament had long experience of urgent procedures. These had mainly been used for agreeing to Bills to assist in the struggle against terrorism. Nonetheless, there were no fixed time limits or schedules specifically applicable to such Bills.

29

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

He asked how the “ping-pong” between the two Chambers was arranged in circumstances where a Bill was affected by the urgent procedure.

Mr Hafnaoui Amrani (Algeria) referring to the hypothesis of the with-drawal of a Bill because it was not agreed, asked whether there was a min-imum time period before which a Bill could be presented for parliamentary approval.

Mr Xavier Roques (France) referring to the situation in France said that the Constitution of the Fifth Republic allowed the Government to decide the Orders of the Day of Parliament.

This provision originally seemed to be a strong weapon in the hands of the Executive. In practice, the Opposition was in no way prevented from delaying the examination of a Bill by putting down hundreds, indeed thou-sands of amendments... since no rule existed to end parliamentary debate within a set time — with the exception of the Finance Bill, which the National Assembly had to examine within 40 days of its First Reading and the Senate within 20 days.

This had meant that another constitutional provision had been used in a different way from its initial purpose — namely the provision which allowed the Government to make the vote on a Bill: in this case, the Bill was con-sidered as agreed to, unless the motion of censure was moved and agreed to. This procedure in particular forced the majority to support the Govern-ment.

From the middle of the 1980s, this procedure had started to be used for an entirely different purpose, namely to combat filibustering and to get agreement on Bills within time limits which were compatible for the rest of the Government’s schedule. This had led to the paradoxical situation where the multiplication of amendments had led no less to a basic loss of power by Parliament, since the Bill would be agreed to without a vote.

Mr Manuel Alba Navarro (Spain) said that in Spain it was for the Gov-ernment to seek to use the urgent procedure, with Parliament itself judging the consequences of whether it was suitable to give in to this request. The Government also had the ability to legislate by decree, although in such cases Congress had to meet within 30 days to agree or disagree with the measures taken.

Mr Ravi Kant Chopra (India) said that certain Parliaments were known to lengthen the course of legislative debate. Such Parliaments were also able on occasion to find the necessary agreement to agree to Bills in very short time limits, if the urgency of the situation demanded it.

Mr Jose Pedro Montero (Uruguay) referring to the three levels of ur-gency which existed in Chile, wanted to know what happened if the Cham-ber did not observe the time limits within which it had to decide: was the Bill agreed to or disagreed to?

Mr Carlos Hoffmann-Contreras said that about 90% of Bills were ex-amined within the framework of urgent procedure.

The Rules fixed the time limits within which each Committee had to de-cide within the urgent procedure. In case of simple urgency, the time limits were 10 days for the first Committee, 10 for the second and 10 for the de-

30

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

bate and vote in plenary session. Such timed limits were naturally shortened if the degree of urgency was higher.

In reply to Mr Hafnaoui Amrani, he said that the President of the Republic had a time limit of one year for presenting a Bill again which had been rejec-ted by the Senate, unless urgency was declared once again in respect of that Bill.

In response finally to Mr José Pedro Montero, he said that the matter would probably be sent to the Constitutional Court but that there was no precedent.

31

A PRESENTATION OF THE STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE

PARLIAMENTOF BURKINA FASO 2004–2014

—

Prosper VokoumaSecretary General of the National Assembly (Burkina Faso)

The Parliament of Burkina Faso, with the financial and technical support of the UNDP, worked out a strategic plan of development over ten years (SDPP 2004–2014).

The SDPP establishes six strategic objectives, namely: strengthened capa-city in the legislative functions; more effective scrutiny of governmental ac-tion; improved dialogue between Members of Parliament and the public; pro-motion of a parliamentary culture supporting peace, tolerance, and con-structive debate; support of the parliamentary administration, and taking into account of similar activities of the National Assembly.

As far as implementation is concerned, the SDPP is separated into five Pri-ority Action plans (PAP), each lasting two years, of which the first, PAP 2004–2005, was carried out successfully.

In the second PAP (2006–2007), each of the six strategic objectives will lead to a series of specific activities, with a particular emphasis on objective Nr. 3, (improvement of the dialogue with the public), and objective Nr. 5, (support of the parliamentary administration) in order to better support the work of Members of Parliament.

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

1. ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATIONA. Context and justification

1. Between independence in 1960 and the introduction of multi-party democracy since 1992, the political life of Burkina Faso was marked by con-siderable instability. Short periods of democratic and quasi-democratic Gov-ernment were intermingled with emergency Governments which put an end to the mandate of Parliament.

2. The Constitution of 1991, approved in a referendum by the citizens of Burkina Faso, marked the beginning of the longest period of stable constitu-tional government in the history of the country.

3. The Constitution of 1991 provides for a semi-presidential system in which the constitutional responsibilities of Parliament are to vote on legisla-tion, to authorise taxation, to scrutinize governmental action, to approve and scrutinize the budget of the State. In the context of these constitutional responsibilities, the legitimacy of Parliament derives from its direct election by the citizens, thus creating a fourth function: that of representation of the public.

4. To implement its long-term commitment to development, the National Assembly of Burkina Faso, with the support of the UNDP, engaged in an am-bitious programme of strategic development over ten years, the SDPP 2004–2014. The SDPP is divided into five priority action plans (PAP) lasting two years, of which the first covered the years 2004–2005. The current project relates to PAP 2006–2007.

5. The SDPP and PAP have four principal objectives: — To improve the system of administration and to modernize Parliament.— To improve the capacity of Parliament to fulfil its legislative and scrutiny

functions. — To improve the capacity of Parliament to carry out its responsibilities for

representation by communication and effective dialogue with the public. — To help Parliament by mobilising all internal and external resources

necessary to its development including the political good-will of its leaders to improve its institutional, technical and administrative capacity.

6. The support of the UNDP for the National Assembly reflects the total emphasis placed by UNDP on support for countries wishing to establish insti-tutional means for improving governance. It is generally recognised that the social objective of the reduction of poverty cannot be achieved except within a democratic framework. Thus, the Millennium Summit of September 2000, which laid down ambitious development objectives as quantifiable ref-erence marks in the fight against poverty, resolved “to function collectively for more inclusive political processes, allowing the true participation of all the citizens in all our countries”.

34

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

B. Parliamentary development7. In 2003 and 2004, the National Assembly carried out an ambitious pro-

gramme of research, evaluation, and dialogue preliminary to the develop-ment of a programme of long-term institutional development. This included a basic study of the public profile of the National Assembly and the relation-ship between the National Assembly and civil society in 2003, and a meet-ing of serving and retired members of Parliament on 7 and 8 November 2003.

8. The research indicated that whereas the overall assessment of Mem-bers of Parliament among the public is not positive, there were several en-couraging factors which could form the basis of a dialogue and improvement of the image of Parliament. The first among these factors was the commit-ment of the President of the National Assembly to address these challenges, the commitment of the chiefs of the various political groups and the admin-istration to work together on an action plan, and the commitment of the UNDP and other development partners to support the National Assembly with this task.

9. These ambitions for parliamentary development are reflected in the or-ganizational objectives of the third legislature of the Fourth Republic (2002–2007):— to promote parliamentary democracy for better contributing to the

establishment of a true democratic culture in the country; — to reinforce the sovereignty of Parliament, in accordance with its

constitutional duties for legislating and scrutiny of governmental action; — to protect the public reputation, the duties and responsibilities of

Members of Parliament; — to include parliamentary diplomacy within the framework of support for

bilateral and multilateral parliamentary co-operation; — to improve the contribution of the National Assembly to the process of

regional and African community construction; — to engage the parliamentary administration in the search of excellence

in producing a better legislative product.10. In order to satisfy the aims of Parliament, a team of consultants, with

the support of UNDP, was given the task of developing a strategic plan in-cluding the following elements:— an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the National

Assembly. — identifying core strategic activities over a ten year period as well as the

resources necessary to carry out these objectives. — a strategy for the use of resources of technical and financial partners. — a mechanism for follow-up and evaluation. — identification of priority activities to form the basis of a priority action

plan (PAP) over two years (2004–2005).

35

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

C. Strategic Development Plan for Parliament (SDPP) 2004–2014

11. On the basis of wide consultations with the principal actors within Par-liament, other national institutions, and civil society, an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of Parliament was developed. This assessment identified the following principal challenges: — In the field of legislation, the weakness of the parliamentary groups and

Members of Parliament in drafting legislation and lack of opportunity for proposing amendments to legislation, in particular given the lack of technical support and the short time for parliamentary discussion of proposed legislation. Unsatisfactory participation of parliamentary opposition in the daily work of Parliament. Insufficient participation of Parliament in the development, implementation and the evaluation of programmes of national development in accordance with the Constitution (101.2)

— The insufficient use of the means for scrutiny available to Parliament, lack of public appreciation of the work and results of parliamentary scrutiny committees and boards of inquiry. Need for closer cooperation with the Court of Auditors.

— There were substantial efforts by the National Assembly to improve its public communications. Nevertheless, the public remains largely ignorant of the constitutional duties of the National Assembly. The mechanisms for dialogue with the two sides of industry (including the media, civil society, and the general public) remain unsatisfactory, whereas not all the members of the Executive are entirely dedicated to the development of a strengthened Parliament able to discharge its constitutional responsibilities to the full.

— While the parliamentary administration is considerably stronger than at the beginning of the Fourth Republic, there remain several challenges including: the need for coordination of the various parliamentary services, the unclear status of Parliamentary civil servants, the need for more information from the principal services of the Assembly, the lack of offices for Members of Parliament and the general insufficiency of the parliamentary buildings.

— The number of women elected with the National Assembly has increased noticeably since independence, and is now comparable with many Parliaments of developed countries. Nevertheless, women continue to be under-represented at Parliament, in the parliamentary service, and in the political life of the nation as a whole.

12. In response to the challenges identified above, six strategic top prior-ities were established, around which a 10-year development programme would be organized. These are: — Strategic objective 1: The National Assembly is able to legislate

efficiently— Strategic objective 2: The quality of scrutiny of governmental action by

the National Assembly is improved

36

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

— Strategic objective 3: Relations between elected officials and the public which they represent are strengthened

— Strategic objective 4: A parliamentary culture supporting peace, tolerance and constructive debate is established

— Strategic objective 5: The capacity of the parliamentary administration is strengthened in order to increase its effectiveness

— Strategic objective 6: Gender is taken into account by the National Assembly.

13. Each strategic objective was split into sub-objectives and for each one a programme was conceived in order to achieve the goals during the SDPP 2004–2014.

14. The sub-objectives for each objective are set out below: — THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY IS ABLE TO LEGISLATE EFFICIENTLY

Members of Parliament, the Government and the public are conscious of the role and the constitutional responsibilities of the National Assembly.

The general committees of the National Assembly are able to carry out efficiently their examination of Government and other bills and amendments.

The Committee of Supply and the Budget is properly equipped to allow it to fulfil all its legislative functions and scrutinize the budget.

Each parliamentary group has the opportunity to examine legislation and to propose amendments.

A legislative programming system is established in order to ensure an effective use of time, staff and physical resources of Parliament.

The legislative documentation system allows immediate access to legislative materials coming from Burkina Faso and elsewhere.

To produce an annual legislative report. Different political interests are suitably represented in Parliament in

its internal structures and decision-making processes. The Members of Parliament understand the international

commitments of Burkina Faso, as well as the role of Parliament in the ratification, application and follow-up of international treaties. Parliament receives sufficient technical support allowing thorough examination of legislation.

Possible revision of the Constitution and the Rules of the National Assembly to support its legislative function.

The National Assembly is equipped with a new building containing the offices and the modern infrastructure necessary to allow it to carry out its constitutional responsibilities efficiently.

— THE QUALITY OF SCRUTINY OF GOVERNMENTAL ACTION BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY IS IMPROVED. Experienced Members of Parliament who are knowledgeable about

general questions of governance and development are able to

37

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

identify the strengths and weaknesses of governmental action within a framework of good governance adapted for Burkina Faso.

To encourage the use of the public and civil society for scrutiny of governmental action.

To improve and encourage the supply of information by the Executive to the National Assembly.

To publish Committee Reports, Committee Reports of investigations, etc as a general principle and non-publication of whole or part of these reports the exception rather than the rule.

— RELATIONS BETWEEN ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THE PUBLIC WHICH THEY REPRESENT ARE STRENGTHENED. The process of public consultation is encouraged, exchanges with

civil society are supported and targeted open days are organized. The parliamentary public information services are strengthened in

order to be more active in the diffusion of information to the public and the media.

An independent Parliamentary radio station is created over time. To establish a programme for the production of radio broadcasts in

the national official languages. To institute a programme of production of written publications,

including the basic texts of Parliament and periodicals. A system is instituted to formalise the links between local councillors

and national elected officials. — A PARLIAMENTARY CULTURE SUPPORTING PEACE, TOLERANCE AND CONSTRUCTIVE

DEBATE IS ESTABLISHED. An effective code of ethics for Members of Parliament which includes

a mechanism of scrutiny is adopted. Continuation of the development of the participation of Burkina Faso

Members of Parliament with the international parliamentary networks in order to allow the exchange of information on questions of interest.

— THE CAPACITY OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ADMINISTRATION IS STRENGTHENED IN ORDER TO INCREASE ITS EFFECTIVENESS. Parliamentary services (procedural, administrative and management)

which are impartial, fully efficient and effective, are established in order to better serve Parliament and the public through the establishment of a coherent strategy of human resources.

A transparent, impartial, effective and efficient mechanism is established to ensure the availability of specialized engineering departments and expertise to assist Members of Parliament in the performance of their duties.

To improve the effectiveness of the management of the National Assembly by founding rigorous systems of scrutiny of accounts.

— GENDER IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY.

38

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

The male and female Members of Parliament are advised to set aside political differences in order to support an effective participation of women in the life of the National Assembly and the political life of Burkina Faso.

The National Assembly takes into account the question of gender in exercising legislative scrutiny responsibilities.

D. The Priority Action plan (PAP)15. The completion of the decennial SDPP is conceived in five bi-annual

stages. The activities to be led in each bi-annual programme of the priority actions (PAP) will be determined by Parliament every two years, starting from the SDPP 2004–2014.

16. The SDPP must be regularly evaluated and adjusted in order to ensure the continued relevance of its contents with the long-term needs for devel-opment of the National Assembly, while remaining within the objectives of the SDPP. The first revaluation of the SDPP is scheduled for 2006.

17. PAP 2004–2005 was developed at the same time as the SDPP. It con-centrates on areas of immediate priority with the possibility for action in the short and medium term.

18. PAP 2006–2007 is built on the achievements of PAP 2004–2005. It con-tains activities which were programmed in PAP 2004–2005 but could not be completed for various reasons, of the activities in PAP 2004–2005 which were begun in 2005 and were scheduled to continue in PAP 2006–2007, and of the activities of the SDPP 2004–2014 which had not been part of PAP 2004–2005.

19. Prodoc, PAPAP 2006–2007 (Project of support for implementation of the Priority Action Plan 2006–2007), is the framework of support of the UNDP to PAP 2006–2007, and is composed of the activities contained in PAP 2006–2007 that the UNDP is starting to support in whole or in part, whether by itself or in collaboration with other organizations.

2. PAPAP STRATEGY 2006–200720. The support of the UNDP for the National Assembly was considered

within the Framework of Inter-Country Co-operation (FIC) 2001–2005, and is an integral part of the strategic objective for democratic Governance. The UNDP began its association with the National Assembly in 2002 with a series of short-term activities such as workshops on the principal global and re-gional priorities of development such as NEPAD, 0MO, and human rights. This was transformed in 2003 into longer term programmes, such as support for dialogue with civil society, and in 2004 with preliminary work for the SDPP, a process described in item 17 of Prodoc.

21. PAPAP 2006–2007 is built on the success of the SDPP and specifically of PAP and PAPAP 2004–2005. Notwithstanding a short period of time in which it was active (from August to December 2005), and the interruption of much of its activities during October and November because of the presid-ential elections, the completion rate is 92%, with 22 of the 24 projects fin-

39

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

ished or in progress at the end of the year. The activities were well received within Parliament, by the PTF, and civil society including the media.

22. During 2005, the activities financed by PAPAP supported five of the six strategic objectives (see item 18); only strategic objective five, the strength-ening of parliamentary administration, was not included. While the National Assembly committed itself to carry out many activities of reform in PAP 2004–2005, the rate of completion of these non-PAPAP activities was relat-ively small because of the lack of resources. Consequently, the National As-sembly proposed a particular emphasis in PAPAP 2006–2007 on strengthen-ing the parliamentary administration.

23. PAPAP 2006–2007 covers each of the six strategic objectives of the SDPP. The range of the principal activities is broad. The completion of the whole range of the activities suggested will require the use of the resources not only controlled by UNDP but also of other development partners, includ-ing the bilateral and multilateral partners with country programmes in Burk-ina Faso, and the institutions total specializing in parliamentary develop-ment (such as the UIP, APF, etc). An important challenge will be the coordin-ation of the development aid with the National Assembly by the coordinated structures established by the SDPP, in order to avoid duplication.

40

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

– Strategic objective 1: The National Assembly is able to legislate efficiently

The objective of the SDPP 2004–2014 in the field of legislation is to im-prove the capacity of the National Assembly to legislate efficiently in two principal ways: — To ensure a better understanding of the constitutional role of Parliament

in the field of legislation, using activities adapted to Parliament, the staff of Parliament, and a larger audience.

— To improve the technical capabilities of Parliament to carry out its legislative responsibilities by a series of activities for training, study, and analysis. Particular stress is laid on support for COMFIB in its responsibilities for analysis and scrutiny of the budget.

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

1.1. The National Assembly is able to legislate effi-ciently 1. The National Assembly is able to legislate effi-ciently

1.1. Members of Parliament, Gov-ernment and the public are con-scious of the role and the constitu-tional responsibil-ities of the Na-tional Assembly

1.1 1. To ensure a training scheme for newly elected Members of the National As-sembly after each general election as well as for those Members of Parliament who are elected in the course of the Parliament. That train-ing must equip the elected officials with the capacity necessary to assume their constitutional responsibilit-ies. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

Planning of this activity star-ted in 2005. In 2006 the preparation of the training will be finished, and it train-ing scheme will be tested with Members of Parliament and others. The materials will be reproduced while waiting for the new Mem-bers of Parliament in 2007.

2006 - DGTTF

Testing of training materials developed in 2005. 1.050.000 FCFA = $US 1.950

Reformulation of training materials after testing. Con-sultants X 3 = 1.500.000 FCFA = $2.800

Copy and publication of 150 guides = 750.000 FCFA, i.e. $1.400

Total = $6.150

1.1.2. To produce a written document appropriate to the audience (Members of Parliament, members of the Government, press, stu-dents) describing the consti-tutional responsibilities of Parliament and Members of Parliament, including power to make laws. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

Printing and publication of the document in 2005.

2006 TRAC

Printing and publication of the document (1000) = 2 500 000 FCFA, i.e. $4.600

Total = $4 600

1.1 3. To produce a broad-cast on the constitutional role of Parliament and Mem-bers of Parliament in the official and national lan-guages on national, private

2006 TRAC

Production of a 30 minute broadcast in four languages = 3.000.000 FCFA = $US 5.500

41

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

and community radio sta-tions as well is on the Parlia-mentary radio station once it established. (PAP 2004–2005).

Work started on this project but financial support is re-quired to produce the broadcast and in particular to allow it to be heard throughout the country.

Distribution = 2.500.000 FCFA = $US 4.650

Total = 10.200 $US

1.1.4. To publish, in the form of booklet, the consti-tution of Burkina Faso and a summary of the rules of Par-liament in the national and official languages

This activity was delayed pending revision of the rules of the National Assembly. Its completion requires support for printing the document (PAP 2004–2005).

2006 TRAC

Production and printing (2000 copies) = 3 500 000 FCFA, i.e. $US 6.500

Total = $US 6 500

1.1.5. A document describ-ing the process for the pro-posal of legislation by mem-bers of the public is pub-lished and distributed to the public, in the official and the main languages (PAP 2004–2005).

2007 Consultant study = 862 500 FCFA = $US 1 600 Printing 1000 copies X 4 = 5 000 000 FCFA = $US 9250

TOTAL = $US 10 850

1.2. The general committees of the National As-sembly are able to carry out effi-ciently their ex-amination of gov-ernment and other bills and amendments

1.2 4. The National As-sembly draws up an annual budget for the committees by holding account of the needs planned as well as an allowance for unforeseen work. (PAP 2004–2005).

During 2005 the Commit-tees prepared schemes of work and budgets for the activities envisaged. Be-cause of budgetary con-straints only limited ex-penditure was possible.

2006 – 2007

PM - YEAR

1.2.5. Funds allocated at each committee in order to allow it to meet annually outside Ouagadougou, with the possibility of public par-ticipation. (SDPP 2004–2014)

2007

Pilot Project - 3 Committees- 2 days of Meetings: travel, food, lodging, media cover = 3 x 13 000 000 FCFA

TOTAL = 39 000 000 FCFA i.e. $US 72 200 ¶

1.2 8. The general commit-tees are given a budgetary head to cover expenditure related to experts invited to contribute written and oral advice on private Members bills (SDPP 2004–2014).

2006 – 2007

PM - YEAR

42

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

1.3. The Commit-tee of Supply and the Budget is properly equipped to allow it to fulfil all its le-gislative functions and scrutinize the budget.

1.3.1. An annual training scheme on the analysis of the budgetary documents for the benefit of the Mem-bers of the Committee of Supply and the Budget and staff. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

The person in charge of the NEX programme will discuss the scope of the training scheme for 2006 and 2007 with the Chairman of the Committee of Supply and the Budget.

2006 – 2007

2006: 1 training consultant (revision and completion module) =862 500 FCFA = $US 1600 Documentation (111 Mem-bers of Parliament + 19 staff = 130) = 780 000 FCFA = $US 1.450 Costs (PM YEAR)

Total = $US 3 050

2007: 1 training consultant (revision and execution module) = 862 500 FCFA = $US 1.600 Documentation (111 Mem-bers of Parliament + 19 staff = 130) = 780 000 FCFA = $US 1.450 Costs (PM YEAR)

Total = $US 3 0501.3 4. The Government presents, during first quarter of each year, a doc-ument describing its general budgetary plans for the fol-lowing year to the Commit-tee of Supply and the Budget. On the basis of this document, the Committee organizes dialogues with the public and those interested in budgetary matters. Be-fore the end of the second quarter, a report accompan-ied by recommendations to the Government is pub-lished. (SDPP 2004–2014)

2006 (See also 1.3.5)

Consultation on and study of possible ways to increase the participation of Parlia-ment and the public in the budgetary process: 1 725 000 FCFA = $US 3.200

Workshop: 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 800

TOTAL = $US 6 000

1.3.5. The Chairman of the Committee of Supply and the Budget and a multi-party delegation of Mem-bers of Parliament go on study trips in order to evalu-ate the possibilities of widening public participa-tion in the development of the budget. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

This was done in 2005. The Committee will organize a workshop in 2006, involving representatives of civil soci-ety, in which the results of its study visit will be dis-cussed and an action plan will be developed.

See 1.3.4.

1.3 6. The process of adop-tion of the law of payment is PM YEAR

43

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

reorganized in coordination with the Court of Auditors in order to make sure that the Committee of Supply and the Budget has sufficient time, information and tech-nical support to examine the accounts of the previous year. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

The report of the consult-ants, written in 2005, is studied by the Committee of Supply and the Budget. If changes with the payment of Parliament are required, the Committee proposes a plan of completion for these changes with Parliament.

1.4 Each parlia-mentary group has the opportun-ity to examine le-gislation and to propose amend-ments.

1.4.5. Training on develop-ment of the law organized for the members and the staff of the parliamentary groups and the general committees of the National Parliament.(Continuation PAPAP 2004 2005)

The impact of this activity is evaluated on the basis of the number of bills pro-posed by Members of Parlia-ment up to the end of 2006.

PM YEAR

1.6 The legislat-ive documenta-tion system al-lows immediate access to legislat-ive materials coming from Burkina Faso and elsewhere.

1.6 2. The contents of the library and the files are catalogued by using a basic system of online data (PAP 2004–2005).

Training is required for an employee who was recently recruited and who will carry out this project. Moreover, the basic software should be bought with a training pack-age included. Lastly, there is still the task of cata-loguing the contents of the library and the files.

2006 Study of the best system to catalogue the files: 862 500 FCFA = $US 1.600

Purchase of software includ-ing training and support for two years: $US 20 000

Total = $US 21 600

2007 Cataloguing files Approxim-ate cost: 5 000 000 FCFA = $US 9.250

Total = $US 9 250 1.6 8. Staff of the resource centre are trained to provide Members of Parlia-ment and legislative staff with essential technical aid for legislative research. (PAP 2004–2005)

A programme of training courses with parliamentary

2006

2 one month exchanges for 2 library/documentation staff, in French-speaking countries: Travel = $US 10 000 Costs = 3.000 x 2 = $US 6 000

44

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

research libraries in French-speaking countries to be es-tablished during 2006/2007.

Total = $US 16 000

2007

2 one month exchanges for 2 library/documentation staff, in French-speaking countries: Travel = $10 000 Costs = $US 3 000 x 2 = $US 6000

Total = $US 16 000 1.7. To produce an annual legis-lative report

1.7 1. With the technical support of an experienced lawyer, an editorial board including representatives of the various parliamentary groups is set up.

1.7.2. A report including a summary of all the legislat-ive activities of the National Assembly, as well as expert comment on the principal legislative matters dealt with by Parliament during the past year, is produced.(Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005) The annual legislative re-view is produced in 2006 and 2007. At the end of 2007, evaluation of the ef-fectiveness of this project and its viability for inclusion in PAP 2008–2009.

2006 - National Consulting DGTTF (2) = 3 450 000 FCFA = $US 6 400 Expert (1) = $US 7 500

Travelling expenses and per diem = $US 7 700 publication = 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 800 TOTAL = $US 24 400 2007 - DGTTF Consultants (4) = 6 900 000 FCFA = $US 12 800 publication. = 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 800 TOTAL = $15 600

1.9 Members of Parliament under-stand the interna-tional commit-ments of Burkina Faso, as well as the role of Parlia-ment in the rati-fication, applica-tion and follow-up of international treaties.

1.9.1 To establish a training scheme on the role of Parlia-ment in the ratification, ap-plication and scrutiny of in-ternational treaties, suppor-ted by an experienced law-yer, in collaboration with the national Parliament, (Con-tinuation PAPAP 2004–2005). A workshop with na-tional experts was held in 2005, and in 2006 a further workshop will be held with an international expert in the role of Parliaments in the development of major national programmes and international agreements re-lating to social and eco-nomic policy.

2006International Consultant = $US 5 000 Travel and per diem = $US 5 900 Documentation (111 Members of Parliament, 19 staff) 650 000 FCFA = $US 1200 costs = 1 965 000 FCFA = $US 3640 TOTAL = $US 15 740

1.9.2 To work out an annual summary of the agreements and international treaties ratified by the National As-sembly. This should be built in to the annual legislative

45

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

review. 1.10. Parliament receives sufficient technical support for thorough ex-amination of le-gislation

1.10.1. Training scheme for technical staff, but open to Members of Parliament, to allow staff to carry out com-parative research on laws in other jurisdictions using the Internet, to produce impar-tial analyses and legislative reports, and to support Members of Parliament in drafting bills. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

A first workshop was held on this subject in 2005. In 2006 and 2007, a consultant will examine the needs and the capacity of the parliament-ary staff in this field, and will propose a training scheme including, where necessary, training courses and other educational activ-ities, training in other coun-tries for key technical parlia-mentary staff.

2006

Assessment of the need for staff to establish improved research for Members of Parliament: Consultant = 862 500 FCFA = $US 1 600

Workshop with the staff of parliamentary groups: Train-ing consultant 862 500 = $US 1 600 Docu-mentation and expenses of organization = 500 000 FCFA = $US 925

TOTAL = $US 4 125

2007 2 exchanges abroad of one month for 2 commit-tee assistants in a French-speaking country Travel = $US 10 000 Costs = $US 3 000 X 2 = $US 6000

Total = 16 000 $US 1.11 Possible re-vision of the Con-stitution and the Rules of the Na-tional Assembly to support its le-gislative function.

Suggested amendment: 1.11. Examination of the legislative procedures in Burkina Faso and elsewhere, with necessary changes to the law and proced-ure of the Na-tional Assembly to improve its le-gislative function.

1.11.1 To undertake a study comparing the legislative procedures of Burkina Faso and those of the other coun-tries, including established democracies and countries in transition towards demo-cracy and to identify best practices for improving le-gislative work in Burkina Faso.(Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

In PAP 2004–2005 this activ-ity was put back to 2006. The description of the res-ults target 1.11 should be changed to reflect more ex-actly the objectives.

2006

Consultant - researcher = 1115 000 FCFA = $US 2 150

Workshop = 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 800

TOTAL =$US 4 950

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 1 2006

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 1 2007

$US 123 315

$US 142 950

– Strategic objective 2: The quality of scrutiny of governmental action by the National Assembly is improved.

Effective scrutiny by Parliament of government activities is essential for the good running of a democratic system. By careful examination of the res-

46

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

ults of the programmes and policies of government, Parliament can ensure that public funds are properly used, and that the principal direction of gov-ernment policy is based on public need. Parliament has a variety of tools at its disposal in order to carry out its responsibilities for scrutiny, including oral and written questions, the formal questioning of ministers, formal in-quiries, and information gathering.

In PAP 2006–2007, stress is laid on the use of external resources to sup-port scrutiny, in particular by Committees. Moreover, action taken in 2006–2007 emphasises the importance of integrating Parliament in the develop-ment, approval, and evaluation of programmes of national importance, in the manner envisaged in the Constitution of Burkina Faso.

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

2 The quality of scrutiny of gov-ernmental action by the National Assembly is im-proved.

2.1. Experienced Members of Par-liament who are knowledgeable about general questions of gov-ernance and de-velopment are able to identify the strengths and weaknesses of governmental ac-tion within a framework of good governance adapted for Burk-ina Faso.

2.1.1. Information seminars for Members of Parliament and the parliamentary staff are organized on questions of national importance such as CSLP, NEPAD, the African Machinery for Peer-group Evaluation, OMD, the strategies for combating cor-ruption, etc. These seminars also involve representatives of the government and civil society in order to ensure a diversity of points of view.(Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

This activity began in 2005 and is an opportunity to dis-cuss important national pro-grammes. The Bureau of the Assembly will agree an an-nual programme of informa-tion seminars at the begin-ning of 2006 and 2007.

2006

2 parliamentary workshops on questions of national im-portance 6 923 000 FCFA x 2 = 13 846 000 FCFA =$US 25 640

TOTAL = $US 25 640

2007

2 parliamentary workshops about questions of national importance 6 923 000 x 2 = 13 546 000 FCFA = $US 25 640

TOTAL = $US 25 640

2.1.2. A formal parliament-ary contribution to all gov-ernmental strategies of na-tional importance such as CSLP, before implementa-tion and at the moment of the examination and the amendment of the pro-grammes, pursuant to art-icle 101 para. 2 of the Con-stitution.

International workshop to compare experiments in various countries of parlia-mentary participation in na-tional strategies such as CSLP. Consultations between the Government, Parliament, and civil society for an agreement on suitable pro-cedures to ensure the suit-

2006

2 international experts (1 of the PNUD-NY)

Honorarium international ex-pert. x 1 = $US 5 000

Travel and per diem = $US 5 900 x 2 = $US 11 800

Honorarium 4 national ex-perts = 2 300 000 =$US 4 250

Costs, international work-shop = 37 179 000 FCFA = $US 68 850

TOTAL = $US 89 900

47

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

able participation of Parlia-ment and public in the de-velopment, adoption, and evaluation of strategies of national importance.

2.2. To encourage public and civil society contribu-tion for scrutiny of governmental ac-tion.

2.2.1. To create for each parliamentary committee a regularly updated heading on the Parliament Website, describing current work of the Committee and inviting the public to contribute on-line and in writing.(PAP 2004–2005). 2.2.2. Each Committee es-tablishes an annual plan of work on its activities of scru-tiny, by selecting in a con-sensual way the questions to submit to a specific examin-ation.

See 1.2.4. 2.2.3. Regular visits, on the basis of the annual plan of work, by the parliamentary committees where that ne-cessary, and budgeted for within the framework of the annual planning process. (SDPP 2004–2014)

See 1.2.4. 2.2.5. Publication, by each Committee, of an annual re-port on its activities, includ-ing a strategy of communic-ation to support a broad publication of the work of the Committee.(SDPP 2004–2014)

See 1.2.4.

2006 National consultant - draft-ing of the 5 reports and communication strategies 4312 500 FCFA = 8 000 $US TOTAL = 8 000 $US

2007 National consultant - draft-ing the 5 reports and com-munication strategies 4 312 500 FCFA = $US 8 000 TOTAL =$US 8 000

2.2.6. Production of regular radio programmes on the work of each Committee, un-der the direction of the Chairman of the Committee, with technical support of committee experts and in coordination with the Parlia-ment communication ser-vice. (PAP 2004–2005)

2007 One radio programme pro-duced and broadcast quarterly by each Commit-tee:4 X 5 X 820 000 FCFA = 16 400 000 FCFA = US 30 350 TOTAL = $US 30 350

2.3. To improve and encourage the supply of in-formation by the Executive to the National As-sembly.

2.3.1. To reach an agree-ment with the Executive so that each ministry prepares an annual report on its activ-ities to be submitted to the National Assembly, which the minister will present to

2006 Consultations and study on the possibilities of strength-ening the exchange of in-formation between the rel-evant Committees and min-istries. National consultant:

48

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected res-ults

Target results Indicative activities Contributions

the relevant Committee. The minister will prepare an-swers to the questions of the Members of the Committee. To manage an agreement with the Executive on the format and the timing of submission by the Govern-ment of the reports to the National Assembly.(SDPP 2004–2014)

1 115 000 FCFA = $US 2 150 Workshop = 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 800 TOTAL = $US 4 950

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 2 2006

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 2 2007

$US 130 010

$US 63 990

– Strategic objective 3: Relations between elected officials and the public which they represent are strengthened.

The participation of the public in the political life of Burkina Faso is guar-anteed in the Constitution. Parliament is the principal means by which the views of the public are directly represented. A strengthened capacity for dia-logue and representation is a principal priority for the third legislature of the Fourth Republic.

During 2006–2007, PAP will support a thorough examination by Parlia-ment of the results of research and other work concluded in 2005 on the questions of representation of the public, with the aim of putting into effect new and improved methods for encouraging public participation.

The strengthening of the representative capacity of Parliament also in-volves strengthening its relationship with interlocutors. In 2005 the first meeting between local councillors and Members of Parliament was held and was a great success; from 2006–2007 this event will be organized annually.

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

3. Relations between elected officials and the public are strengthened.

3.1. The processes of public consulta-tion are improved, regular use of pub-lic hearings, ex-changes with civil society and organ-ization of targeted open days.

3.1.1. To organize an interna-tional seminar and study trips on the various forms of par-liamentary consultations.(Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

Study visit was carried out in 2005 to Niger, however the international seminar was not carried out.

2006 International expert - parti-cipation and good gov-ernance honorarium:$US 5 000 Travel and per diem = $US 5 900 2 national experts participa-tion = 1115 000 FCFA =$US 2 150 Costs of the workshop = 2 500 000 FCFA = $US 4 650

TOTAL = $US 17 700 3.1.2. To organize round tables between civil society and Members of Parliament on the question. (PAP 2004–2005)

2007 Documentation (study for dis-cussion prepared within the framework of activity 3.1.1) = 1 115 000 FCFA = $US 2

49

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

The international seminar suggested in activity 3.1. 1., like the report on the Niger visit, will be the start-ing point for this process of discussion.

150 Costs - round tables 6 923 000 FCFA = $US12 800

2 national consultants: organ-izer, rapporteur, drafting of the final report = 1 725 000 FCFA = $US 3 200

TOTAL = $US 18 150 3.2. The parlia-mentary public in-formation service is strengthened in order to be more active in the pub-lication of informa-tion to the public and the media.

3.23. To develop the capacity of parliamentary correspond-ents so that they understand properly the role of Parlia-ment and Members of Parlia-ment by organizing regular workshops with journalists and Members of Parliament on questions such as: - How to improve the image and the impact of Parliament, - To in-crease the exchange of in-formation between the media and Parliament.Establishment of a code of conduct which could govern the relations between the parliamentary press and Par-liament. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)Activities for PAP 2006–2007 will include support for the revitalisation of the parlia-mentary press association, including a financial contribu-tion to organize regular work-shops as under consideration in 3.2.3.

2006: 3 expert workshops of under area Fees: $US 7 500 Per diem / travel: $US 5 700 Costs of organization: 1 500 000 FCFA x 3, ie 4 500 000 FCFA = $US 8 350TOTAL = $US 21 550

2007: 3 Sub Regional Expert workshops Fees: $US 7 500 Per diem / travel: $US 5 700 Costs of organization: 1 500 000 FCFA x 3 = 4 500 000 FCFA =$US 8 350 TOTAL = $US 21 550

3.2.4. To organize pro-grammes of "coaching" the press, in collaboration with an association of the parlia-mentary press in a democrat-ically established country. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005) A programme of short term "coaching" was organized in 2005. A longer-term project will be organized in 2006–2007, including a programme of exchange between the Members of Parliament in Burkina Faso and democratic-ally established countries.

2006: press coaching pro-grammes Total = 9 279 827 FCFA = $US 17 200 TOTAL = $US 17 200

2007: press coaching pro-grammes II Total = 9 279 827 FCF = $US 17 200 TOTAL = $US 17 200

3.3. An independ-ent parliamentary radio station is set up over time.

3.3.1. To carry out a further study into a dedicated radio station which will examine the various alternatives offered by assessing the costs and effectiveness of the options in relation to the ne-cessary independence of the radio station. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

2007 (indicative only, according to the results of the study being led during 2005 under the heading of 3.3.1) Equipment for local radio broadcasts = $US 44 000

TOTAL = $US 44 000

50

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

Based on the results of the 2005 study, the equipment necessary is obtained and the staff is recruited to allow the setting up of the radio service before the end of 2007 (see SDPP 3.3.2. – 3.3.5)

3.6. A system is in-stituted to formal-ise the links between the local and national gov-ernment.

3.6.2. The National Assembly institutes an annual meeting with the local councillors in order to share experience and concerns. (Continuation and PAPAP 2004–2005)

After the success of this activity in 2005, meetings will be organized in 2006 and 2007. A Steering Committee, including representatives of the National Assembly and municipalities of Burkina Faso, will choose a suitable principal topic for each con-ference.

2006: Annual meeting between local councillors and Members of Parliament.37 231 723 FCFA = $US 68 950 TOTAL = $US 68 950 2007:

2007: Annual meeting between local councillors and Members of Parliament. 37 231 723 FCFA =$US 68 950 TOTAL = $US 68 950

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 3 2006

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 3 2007

$US 107 700

$US 169 850

– Strategic objective 4: A parliamentary culture supporting peace, tolerance and constructive debate is established.

In spite of a history of sudden ruptures with democracy, since 1991 Burk-ina Faso has conscientiously embarked on a process of constructive dialogue within democratic structures. No institution is more important for the suc-cess of this process than the National Assembly. Parliament showed its en-gagement towards long-term democratic development with the preparation and implementation of SDPP 2004–2014.

During 2004–2005, Parliament began the development of a parliamentary code of ethics. This was a response to the public desire for greater transpar-ency in the operation of Parliament which was noticed during the basic study of public perceptions of Parliament and Members of Parliament carried out in 2003. In PAP 2006–2007 the preliminary work will be thorough with the aim of establishing a code of ethics before the end of PAP.

Democratic discussion does not only take place in the frontiers of a coun-try, but is more and more international via international institutions and par-liamentary networks. The National Assembly of Burkina Faso has taken a leadership role in several international parliamentary forums. During PAP 2006–2007, the National Assembly will encourage further international dia-logue, in particular between Parliaments of the region.

51

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

4. A parliamentary culture supporting peace, tolerance and constructive debate is estab-lished

4.1. A code of eth-ics for Members of Parliament which includes a mech-anism of scrutiny and effective re-sponsibility is ad-opted

4.1.1 To carry out a compar-ative study of certain codes of ethics in Parliaments and to use the results to work out a code of ethics specific to Burkina Faso Members of Par-liament (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

A parliamentary special sub-committee will be established to present recommendations concerning a parliamentary code of ethics. It should in-clude the representation of the various political tenden-cies, and, as far as possible, a representation of outside ex-perts on anticorruption. Dur-ing 2006 the Committee will visit a country with a strong code of parliamentary ethics. With the support of national and international experts, the committee will work out a proposal for a code of ethics including a code of ethics (4.1.2. – 4.1.5)

2006 International Consultant Fees = 10 000 $US Travel and per diem = 8 600 $US 2 National Consultants = 2 300 000 FCFA = 4 250 $US Dialogues - Dialogue - Public Consultations = 13 991 250 FCFA = 25 900 $US

TOTAL = 48 750 $US

4.1.2. Visit by a multi-party delegation to African Parlia-ments which have adopted a code of ethics. (PAP 2004–2005)

2006 Travel to 3 African countries with codes of parliamentary ethics 5 people x $US 9 000 = $US 45 000

TOTAL = $US 45 000 4.1.3. To provide technical support to Parliament for drafting the code of ethics. (PAP 2004–2005)

2007 2 national consultants =1 115 000 FCFA = $US 2 125 TOTAL = $US 2 125

4.1.4. To organize meetings of orientation for Members of Parliament once the code of ethics will have been adop-ted. (PAP 2004–2005)

2007 2 national consultants =575 000 FCFA = $US 1 050 2 planning meetings = 3 000 000 FCFA = $US 5 550 TOTAL = $US 6 600

4.1.5. To adopt a strategy of communication for the me-dia, civil society and public. (PAP 2004–2005)

2007 Editing, reproduction, public-ation (radio, TV, in the 4 lan-guages) 5 330 000 FCFA = $US 9 850 TOTAL = $US 9 850

4.2. Continuing to develop the parti-cipation of Burkina Faso Members of Parliament in inter-national parlia-mentary networks in order to allow exchange of in-formation on ques-tions of interest.

4.2.1. In collaboration with parliamentary organizations (for example IPU and AFP) and the African regional Par-liaments, to encourage Mem-bers of Parliament to talk about questions of interest such as participation of wo-men in policy, the legislative process, the review of gov-ernmental policies, the role of the Opposition, the repres-entative function of Members of Parliament, etc. (PAP

See 2.1.2, 4.1.1

52

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

2004–2005)

The international seminars suggested in activities 2.1.2 and 4.1.1 are examples of this kind of activity. 4.2.2. To develop regional and international networks to encourage exchanges on par-liamentary questions and de-velopment (PAP 2004–2005)

See 2.1.2, 4.1.1

4.2.3. To intensify the parti-cipation of Members of Parlia-ment in seminars and inter-national parliamentary work-shops on questions of in-terest (AIDS, corruption, debt, etc.)

PM (UNDP - YEAR - Other PTFs)

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 4 2006

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 4 2007

$US 93 750

$US 18 575

– Strategic objective 5: The capacity of the parliamentary administration is strengthened in order to increase its effectiveness

A strong parliamentary administration and adapted infrastructures and equipment are the essential foundations of a strong Parliament. Since the creation of the Fourth Republic, the parliamentary administrative staff has been strengthened, and considerable improvements were made to the phys-ical structure of the National Assembly. Nevertheless, the number of staff re-mains insufficient to provide effective technical support to Members of Par-liament in their work, and the buildings are unsatisfactory for the effective scrutiny of the parliamentary tasks in several ways.

A certain number of activities to allow the strengthening of the parlia-mentary administration were included in PAP 2004–2005. These measure-ments included confirmation of the legal status of the parliamentary admin-istration, a training plan for the National Assembly, as well as increased sup-port of staff of parliamentary groups. Financial assistance with these activit-ies was not provided in PAPAP 2004–2005, and consequently the completion of some aspects of PAP for this strategic objective was not possible.

For PAP 2006–2007, stress will be laid on the strategic re-examination of the technical needs of staff of the National Assembly, on supporting the im-provement of the infrastructure of the parliamentary network in the prin-cipal Parliament building, and on planning the strengthening of the parlia-mentary documentation system.

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

5. The capacity of the parliamentary

5.1. Impartial, fully efficient and ef-

5.1.3. To define operational responsibilities by setting up See 5.1.6

53

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

administration is strengthened in or-der to increase its effectiveness.

fective parliament-ary services (pro-cedural, adminis-trative and man-agement) are es-tablished in order to better serve Parliament and the public by the in-stallation of a co-herent strategy for human resources.

rules for operation and a clear division of the respons-ibilities between the proced-ural/legislative and adminis-trative support in conformity with the statute for the par-liamentary public office (PAP 2004–2005) 5.1.6. To re-examine the re-quirements in human re-sources taking account of the new structure and to write descriptions of functions for all posts by specifying the re-quired qualifications, the level of expertise, etc. (PAP 2004–2005) This important activity, with 5.1.3., would draw benefit from a partnership with a parliamentary administration in a French-speaking country with a confirmed democracy.

2007 International consultant = $US 20 000 Travel and DSA = $US 9 500 TOTAL = $US 29 500

5.1.8. To re-examine in order to improve the mechanism for preparation of the budget of Parliament (PAP 2005–2005)

Coordination with activities 5.1.3., 5.1.6 and 5.3.4.

2007 International consultant = $US 20 000 Travel and DSA =$US 9 500 TOTAL = $US 29 500

5.1.10. To identify additional requirements both for equip-ment and networking in order to allow installation and ex-tension of an internal elec-tronic communication net-work (Intranet) and of a func-tional Website. (APP 2004–2005)

5.1.11. To proceed gradually with the purchase and install-ation of the equipment ne-cessary to operate an In-tranet network by identifying the services to be equipped as a priority.

The wiring of a great part of Parliament was carried out in 2004 and 2005 by the finan-cing of the APF. However two buildings still require wiring and connection to the net-work.

2006 Study of the remaining needs for setting up a network throughout Parliament and of the means of satisfying these needs (wiring or wifi)

International consultant = 862 500 FCFA = $US 1 600 Purchase and installation for equipment necessary to the operation of the network (in-dicative) = $US 43 600

TOTAL = $US 47 900

5.1.13. To develop a training scheme in data processing using the Internet to acquire information and to research for the parliamentary com-mittees and the Secretariat-general. (PAP 2004–2005)

See 1.10.1.

See 1.10.1

5.2. A transparent, 5.2.1. To carry out an evalu- To harmonize activities

54

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

impartial, effective and efficient mech-anism is estab-lished to ensure the availability of specialized engin-eering depart-ments and expert-ise to assist Mem-bers of Parliament in the performance of their duties.

ation of the system of parlia-mentary documentation and to make recommendations in order to facilitate research (PAP 2004–2005)

This would be a suitable activity for a partnership between the National As-sembly of Burkina Faso and the Parliament of another French-speaking country with an established democratic system.

1.6.2. 2007 International consult-ant Fees - $US 5 000

Travel and per diem: $US 6 800 National consultant 862 500 FCFA = $US 1 600

TOTAL = $US 8 400

5.2.2. To set up a system of indexing and electronic cata-loguing and to train the staff in consequence (PAP 2004–2005)

See 1.6.2 and 1.6.8.

See 1.6.2 and 1.6.8.

5.2.7. To develop capacity within the parliamentary ad-ministration in order to be able to offer in an effective way the following services: translation/interpretation, re-cording, transcription, draft-ing of reports, filing, etc. (SDPP 2005–2014)

This would be a suitable activity for a partnership between the National As-sembly of Burkina Faso and the Parliament of another French-speaking country with an established democratic system.

2007 International consultant = $US 20 000 Travel and DSA = $US 9 500 Workshop = 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 800 TOTAL = $US 32 300

5.3. To improve the effectiveness of the manage-ment of the Na-tional Assembly by founding rigorous systems for scru-tiny of accounts.

5.3.3. To make sure that all the development projects of Parliament are integrated in the system of financial man-agement of Parliament (PAP 2004–2005)

PM YEAR

5.3.4. To increase the capa-city of the Committee of Sup-ply and the Budget. The Com-mittee could use external ex-pertise (PAP 2004–2005)

See 5.1.8.

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 5 2006

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 5 2007

$US 93 750

$US 18 575

– Strategic objective 6: Gender is taken into account by the National Assembly

Although the representation of women in the National Assembly is roughly comparable to representation in Parliaments in other developing countries as well as in developed countries, it is still the case that women

55

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

are underrepresented in Parliament, in the parliamentary administration, and indeed in the political life of Burkina Faso generally. The low level of rep-resentation of women can have a negative impact on policy, because social development depends on a broad understanding of development needs which is sensitive to gender questions.

During 2004–2005, the National Assembly established a “gender Caucus”, which represents a formal commitment to address gender questions within Parliament and the intention to examine further the capacity of Parliament to deal with gender and development questions. The “gender caucus” en-gaged in a planning process to establish a scheme of detailed annual work of activities.

During 2006–2007 PAP will consider a range of activities to support the work of the Committee on Gender and to stress the overarching importance of policy analysis which is sensitive to gender and development questions. The activities supported by the Project of Support for PAP (PAPAP) 2006–2007 will also include staff training to allow technical support to Members of Parliament in the analysis of the impact on gender questions of legislation and government action, as well as continued training targeted at Members of Parliament and the staff of the National Assembly on gender questions.

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

6. Gender is taken into account by the National Assembly.

6.1 Male and fe-male Members of Parliament should cooperate outside party boundaries in order to support effective participa-tion of women in the life of the Na-tional Assembly and the political life of Burkina Faso.

6.1.3. The “gender Caucus” undertakes research with the support of the parliamentary staff and experts in civil soci-ety, including necessary study visits, in order to work out an action plan for the equitable involvement of men and women in the work of the National Assembly. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

The “gender Caucus” will work narrowly with the ex-perts of civil society to de-velop an action plan for the two activities 6.1.3 and 6.1.5.

2006 Study visit - Gender caucus - Travel =5 x $US 5 000 = $US 25 000

Drafting action plan - Na-tional consultant = 1 150 000 FCFA = $US 2 150 Workshop = 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 800

TOTAL = $US 29 950

6.1.4. The “gender Caucus” carries out dialogues with the political parties, women’s or-ganizations, civil society, and the Executive on the advant-ages of establishing a quota system for parliamentary elections. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

The gender caucus will pre-pare and submit a report to Parliament on the advant-ages and disadvantages of a quota system for Parliament-ary elections, with recom-mendations for possible ac-tion.

2006

Workshop = 6 923 000 FCFA = $US 12 800

TOTAL = $US 12 800

6.1.5. The “gender Caucus” 2007 Implementation of the

56

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Expected results Target results Indicative activities Contributions

prepares an annual plan of activities to support a greater involvement of the women in development and good gov-ernance in Burkina Faso. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005) See 6.1.3.

annual plan of activities (in-dicative contribution based on the results of activity 6.1.3) 25 000 000 FCFA = $US 46 300 TOTAL = $US 46 300

6.2. The National Assembly takes into account gender in exer-cising legislative and scrutiny re-sponsibilities.

6.2.1 The legislative staff is trained to carry out analyses gender on legislation. (SDPP 2004–2014)

2006 2 national consultants = 1 728 000 FCFA = $US 3 200 Costs= 1 560 000 FCFA = $US 2 900 TOTAL = $US 6 100

6.2.2. A study is undertaken annually on the gender im-pact of the budget, by the staff of the Committee of Supply and the Budget within the framework of the budget-ary process. (Continuation PAPAP 2004–2005)

A team containing represent-atives of civil society, selec-ted by the Committee, as well as staff of Parliament will be responsible for undertak-ing the study and preparing its results.

2006 Study on the gender impact of the budget/2 con-sultants: 1 728 000 FCFA = $US 3 200 Workshop: 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 780 TOTAL = $US 5 980

2007 Study on the gender impact of the budget 2 na-tional consultants 1 728 000 FCFA = $US 3 200 Workshop 1 500 000 FCFA = $US 2 780 TOTAL = $US 5 980

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 6 2006

TOTAL RESOURCES - RESULT 6 2007

$US 54 830

$US 52 280

– Coordination, implementation and evaluation SDPPI PAP 2006–2007/PAPAP 2006–2007

The success of PAP 2004–2005 was achieved in spite of important con-straints including a narrow window of time to carry out activities due to delays in the completion of the Project of Support for PAP (PAPAP 2004–2005). The success of the project reflects the engagement of the National Assembly, as well as the financial and technical support of the UNDP through PAPAP. PAP 2006–2007 was prepared towards the end of 2005 to al-low the continuation into 2006 of activities started in 2005.

Effective completion of PAP 2006–2007, and the development of syner-gies with other development activities of Parliament, will depend on in-creased resources being assigned to the completion of the project. This will allow a greater participation within Parliament in the planning and scrutiny of the SDPP, PAP, and PAPAP programmes.

During 2006–2007, efforts will be redoubled to increase the participation of technical and financial partners in the process of parliamentary develop-ment. It is important that technical and process-related barriers do not block the development of a broader network of international partners supporting the crucial role of Parliament in the development of a balanced democratic system in Burkina Faso.

57

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

In addition to collaboration with current partners in Burkina Faso, PAP 2006–2007 relies on partnership with other Parliaments, in particular from French-speaking countries. Several activities suggested during 2006–2007 envisage the participation of international experts of other Parliaments in training for the National Assembly of Burkina Faso, or exchanges allowing Members of Parliament and the staff of the National Assembly to learn best practice in other Parliaments.

Mr Xavier Roques (France) wanted to know about the expected changes in parliamentary administration and the needs that he thought were most pressing within that — in particular, relating to scrutiny activity.

Mr Mamadou Santara (Mali) thought that the communication was an important contribution to the development of a Parliament and wanted to know what place it had in the framework of the Decennial Plan.

He also wanted to know more about the recruitment of potential backers, whether bilateral or multilateral.

Mr Hafnaoui Amrani (Algeria) thought that the Plan was the basis for serious thought. He wanted to know whether the Government or Parliament was the originator of this initiative and, if the latter, whether an ad hoc Com-mittee had been set up.

He wanted to know whether a quantitative assessment of the first two years of the programme could be prepared.

Mr Prosper Vokouma said that the status of parliamentary staff had been reviewed from the beginning of the Programme, during the period 2004–2005. From now on, the staff had a clear status based only on Parlia-ment and had better conditions than the rest of the civil service.

Starting from 2004, an annual training programme had been decided. The strategic partner for this was the Ecole Nationale d’Administration et de Ma-gistrature (ENAM) of Burkina Faso. All levels of staff now benefited, during the period between sittings, from training arranged by ENAM.

As far as support for the legislative service was concerned, the staff of Committees and parliamentary groups had been strengthened.

In response to the question from Mr Mamadou Santara, he said that the communication was certainly part of the Strategic Plan for Development, within Objective 3. On the other hand, Parliament had no other projects than those featured in the strategic objectives for development over the 10-year period. Co-operation with the National Assembly in France, UNDP and the In-ternational IDEA was within this framework.

The initiative for the Strategic Plan arose in Parliament, although the dia-logue was immediately started with Government. A Pilot Committee, presided over by the Speaker of the National Assembly and including the five Chairmen of the parliamentary groups, the five Chairmen of the Stand-ing Committees and the Secretary General, managed the whole programme.

58

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

A Working Group, including all the Chairmen of Committees, the Secretary General, two Director Generals and a project leader, managed the operation and daily running of the programme.

Mr Marc Bosc (Canada) referring to Strategic Objective 1, asked what was meant by legislating “efficiently” — efficiency was often a priority ob-jective of the Government and not of Parliament in general and of the op-position in particular.

Mr Prosper Vokouma admitted that the interests of the Government and the Opposition were, by their very nature, contradictory. He said that the aim was simply to get rid of procedural devices which excessively slowed down the course of debate on legislation.

Mr Jean Sindayigaya (Burundi) said that a similar experiment in inter-national cooperation was in course in Burundi. He wanted to know the cost of the Strategic Development Plan over a 10-year period and the outturn for bringing about the objectives of the programme over the period 2004–2005. In addition, in financing this Plan, he asked about the respective parts played by UNDP, bilateral aid and direct support.

Mr Prosper Vokouma said that the cost of the programme was truly enormous, the original estimate bordering on 3 billion francs CFA.

As far as the PAP 2004–2005 was concerned, over 92% of the objectives had been achieved according to an evaluation undertaken by an external auditor: the status of staff had been settled, the Rules of the Assembly had been revised, all the precincts of the Assembly were now cabled, there was an Internet room open to everyone which had 25 computers and was run-ning successfully etc.

Mr Georges Brion (Belgium) wanted to know how the international ex-perts and consultants had been recruited.

Mr Prosper Vokouma said that the experts mainly came from the par-liamentary world, being either Members of Parliament or members of staff.

Mr Marc Rwabahungu (Burundi) drew attention to the time required for getting hold of the international experts and on the difficulties involved in identifying backers, which from time to time created uncertainties in car-rying out the programme.

Mr Prosper Vokouma thought that only strong political will, coming from the Speaker himself, could ensure the success of such a programme.

59

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DIGITAL CHAMBER

—

Won-Jong SangActing Secretary General of the National Assembly

(Republic of Korea)

I. INTRODUCTIONKeeping abreast with the age of informatization, the Republic of Korea, a

leading IT country, applied cutting-edge information technologies to the Na-tional Assembly and transformed it into a ‘Digital National Assembly’, thereby creating a complete ubiquitous environment and dramatically re-vamping the legislative support systems.

The basis for the ‘Digital National Assembly’ has been laid by continu-ously making into a database all the laws enacted by the National Assembly; all the data on the legislative histories of bills, budget, and accounts; the content of pending bills; and also the minutes of all the meetings taking place in the National Assembly. Afterwards, the ‘Electronic Data Network’ has been established to enable high-speed electronic transfer of large files between the legislature and the executive, and the plenary and committees.

In September 2005, the Korean National Assembly set up a ‘digital cham-ber’, the first of its kind in the world, which is the central pillar of the Digital National Assembly and since then has conducted meetings electronically in-cluding deliberating agenda and casting votes. By digitalizing the chamber, the proceedings have become more efficient and the members of parlia-ment can now conveniently access diverse and accurate information regard-ing the agenda and focus more on the agenda itself and its deliberation. Fur-thermore, the ‘Internet Broadcasting System’ is set up to broadcast meet-ings live through the Internet and therefore to better serve people’s right to know.

Such an IT-based digital system not only facilitates legislative activities of MPs but also allows MPs, government offices, and the public to swiftly and accurately exchange and utilize diverse and ample information required for legislation at anytime, anywhere. The system, therefore, is expected to en-able the timely introduction of national policies and also to enhance political participation of the public.

II. DIGITAL SYSTEMS INSTALLED IN THE CHAMBER1. Multimedia Infrastructure— Two large electronic screens with a diagonal measurement of 210 inches

each are mounted in the front of the chamber to create a multimedia plenary chamber. The digital screens are designed to display streaming video clips when MPs take the floor or address the cabinet members and also to present slides. The electronic screens are installed in a way so that they can be controlled from the LCD monitor and the controlling device at the podium.

— Since the introduction of the digital screens, it has become quite common for MPs to use visual aids and slides when they make statements or direct questions to cabinet members. All in all, thanks to the electronic boards, MPs are able to carry out their legislative duties more effectively using vivid and graphic materials. Along with these functions, the boards are also expected to be used for video conferencing between MPs and ministers in the near future.

Overview of the Digital Chamber Images Displayed on the Electronic Screen

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

2. Enhanced Efficiency through E-Meeting Infrastructures2.1. Electronic Ballot System— Inside the chamber, electronic systems for both open and secret ballots

are established to ensure the accuracy and promptness of the votes and to preserve and utilize the results for various purposes.

— As for open ballots where the names of the MPs are made public, votes can be cast either through the touch-screen on their individual monitor or by pressing buttons on the right hand side of their desk for a stable backup. Besides, there are additional sub-systems to support the main ballot system such as the central control system that helps to manage the entire ballot process from the beginning to end and to display of results. Other aiding functions include visualizing the outcome in many different ways using graphics and statistical techniques, incorporating the results into a database, and distributing information to the public in real-time through the Internet.

— As for secret ballots, a kiosk touch screen system is installed to reduce time by 2-3 times compared to the existing ballot system. The system is designed and the equipment is selected in an objective and impartial manner so as to avoid any controversies over anonymity and double voting.

Secret Ballot Device Inside Kiosk

2.2. Paperless Chamber— To create a digital chamber, each seat in the plenary hall is equipped

with a ‘Server Based Computing (SBC)’ terminal and the entire meeting process is systematically computerized. There is also a system set up to monitor data pertaining to the proceedings.

— The SBC terminals are equipped with an e-book system that allows users to turn pages by touching the screens, go directly to the table of contents, enlarge or reduce pages, view single or double pages, and

63

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

search documents using keywords. Not only that, the terminals come with all the functions found in personal computers such as the Internet, e-mail, messenger, word processing and saving, thus providing greater access to meeting materials and creating a paperless chamber which also helps to cut back cost and preserve environment.

Speaker’s Seat SBC Terminal

Open Ballot System MP’s Seat

2.3. Complete Systematization of Proceedings— Based on the order of business, the entire process of proceedings

including introducing bills, voting, speaking, and inquiring are all integrated into a single system to provide customized information to users. Thanks to the system, the Speaker, MPs, and the staffs can gain

64

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

materials relevant to their roles and the results of meetings are automatically collected into a database and managed there.

— This system is based on the ‘Server Based Computing’ technology. Given that there are multiple participants in each sitting, the SBC technology helps to control individual PCs from the center so that all the MPs can remain engaged throughout the meeting.

— There is also a system that monitors and manages changes in the proceedings. Through an interactive network established between the Speaker and the MPs, or between staffs, the system helps to move the meetings forward and to respond flexibly to the changes that occur during the proceedings.

Menu Screen on MP’s Terminal

2.4. Proceedings Monitoring System— This system offers information needed to effectively conduct meetings.

For instance, a built-in sensor in each seat monitors in real-time the attendance of MPs and shows whether or not quorums are met. The system also helps MPs to call for assistance from staffs and to sign up to take the floor.

3. Electronic Data Network between the Legislature and the Executive

— The ‘Electronic Data Network’ is established to allow users to exchange files electronically between the plenary and the standing committees and between the parliament and pertinent government ministries.

— The high-speed network enables MPs to electronically send and receive documents that are produced in each legislative phase; introducing a bill, referring to the relevant standing committee, deliberating, reporting to the plenary, deciding in the plenary, and finally, transferring the bill to the government.

65

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

— By opting for the ‘Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)’ method, the ‘Electronic Data Network’ allows simultaneous transfer of sizable files on agenda. The system drastically enhanced accuracy and promptness in handling documents thereby contributing to higher efficiency and lower cost.

4. Improved Public Information ServiceThe ‘Vote Info Sharing System’ offers detailed information on the voting

results of bills while the ‘Bill Tracking System’ allows the general public to track any bills under consideration. Both systems have notably improved public information services.

4.1. Vote Info Sharing System— This system consolidates into a database the results of votes along with

the content of bills. And the data compiled is made available to the public in real-time through the Internet. The data can be searched in various ways either by entering the names of MPs, the title of bills or dates. And the collected data can be utilized to analyze votes in conjunction with the basic personal information of MPs such as their constituency, age, and educational background.

4.2. Bill Tracking System— The ‘Bill Tracking System’ shows real-time via the Internet where a

particular bill is at in the legislative process. By simply logging onto the Internet, people can check which stage a bill has reached in a multi-phased legislative process; from the introduction of a bill, first reading at the plenary, deliberation by the relevant standing committee, consideration of legality and wording by the Legislative and Judiciary Committee, reporting back to the plenary, and to voting.

— With the system in place, the sponsor, the government, interest groups, and the general public can check the status of a bill in the legislative process in real-time.

4.3. Internet Broadcasting System— By broadcasting plenary and committee proceedings live through the

Internet, the ‘Internet Broadcasting System’ strengthens the accountability of MPs in fulfilling their responsibilities and satisfies the public’s right to know.

— The ‘Internet Broadcasting System’ broadcasts live or offer VOD services on all plenary and committee meetings.

— By securing around 20 channels, the system ensures that all meetings that may overlap in schedule are broadcast simultaneously on-line. The system has also automated filming, editing, and image adjusting functions that were previously performed manually.

66

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

— As for the VOD services, the videos are classified according to MPs, agenda, and sittings so that they can be searched easily. The videos can also be downloaded at the request of the persons filmed in the videos.

— The ‘Internet Broadcasting System’ offers the general public easy access to legislative activities through the Internet and therefore allows them an opportunity to evaluate the performances of the legislators and engage more proactively in the politics which in turn enhances the accountability of MPs and serves the public’s right to know.

III. CONCLUSIONSThe ‘Digital Chamber’ of the Korean National Assembly aims to go beyond

creating a mere paperless meeting room or improving the efficiency of meetings through a sophisticated electronic voting system. Its ultimate goal is to usher in an era of ‘Ubiquitous Politics’ where the public can stay at-tuned to politics whenever, wherever they are.

Through digitalization, the Korean National Assembly has turned the pro-ceedings effective and lively while enabling omni-directional monitoring and interactive communications. However, the endeavours of the Korean Na-tional Assembly do not end here. Building upon these achievements, it as-pires to extend the laudable features of the ‘digital chamber’ beyond its confined walls to each and every meeting held in the parliament and even to local councils. In so doing, the Korean National Assembly aims to invite greater public participation so that, at the end of the day, it can position it-self as a genuinely open and attentive legislature and contribute to further advancing democracy.

Mrs Doris Katai Katebe Mwinga (Zambia) thought that many Mem-bers of Parliament remained attached to paper and wanted to know how it had been possible to convert the Korean Members to a “paperless Parlia-ment”.

In addition, how had the Members of Parliament in practice used the visual supports at their disposal (slide shows etc) in the course of debates?

Mrs Claressa Surtees (Australia) wanted to know more about the pre-paratory stages in advance of this great technological leap forward. In addi-tion, as far as broadcasting debates on the Internet was concerned, had there been any assessment of the success of this exercise (number of con-sultations, downloading etc)?

Mr Mihai Stanescu (Romania) wondered about the methods of main-taining security of the system. In Romania the information network of the Chamber had been attacked by hackers on several occasions. In addition, how did one ensure that Members of Parliament remained on their seats — this being necessary to register their presence during a vote?

67

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Mr Won-Jong Sang said that the Korean Members of Parliament were not opposed to this change, in particular because his predecessor as Secret-ary General of the Chamber, at the start of the project, had formerly been a member of staff of Samsung and was a former Minister for Information and Technology. An ad hoc Committee had been established, made up of Mem-bers of Parliament, which had taken pains to overcome reluctance and ob-tain the support of Members of Parliament.

In the course of debates, Members of Parliament could not stay on their seat if they wanted to put a question and had to go to the Tribune: it was then that they could make use of additional visual supports to reinforce their contributions.

Turning to the question put by Mrs Claressa Surtees, he said that the de-cision to digitise the Hemicycle had been put in effect in two months, taking into account sitting times (with, in addition, two months for preparation). The system had become operational in September 2005.

As far as broadcasting on the Internet was concerned, he said that sit-tings were recorded and automatically broadcast on the Web. A consumer survey had been run for users, although unfortunately the results had not yet become known.

As far as security of the information network was concerned, very effi-cient software firewalls had been installed and, in case of breakdown, a sub-stitute system automatically came into play.

For the older Members of Parliament, necessarily the most reluctant to embrace this technological change, work had been done in the course of the preparatory phase on means of overcoming their problems. The system which had been established was very user-friendly and in particular made strong use of a touchscreen. In addition, assistants were permanently at the disposal of Members of Parliament to give help where it was needed.

Mr Xavier Roques (France) said he admired the Korean experiment. He doubted whether it could be transposed to France with the Hemicycle of the National Assembly and its pictures dating from the end of the 18th century and the start of the 19th century. In such circumstances, the intrusion of computer screens would present an aesthetic problem.

The French National Assembly had the reverse problem of too much com-munication, since Members of Parliament were sometimes tempted to en-gage in telephone conversations during the public sittings in the plenary. It had become necessary to install special systems to break up mobile phone communications.

Mr Petr Tkachenko (Russian Federation) asked for an estimate of the cost of all the operation. Were the resulting expenses an integral part of the budget itself and had there been a tender for the scheme before the con-tract had been let?

As far as what Mr Xavier Roques had said, he said that in the Upper House of the Russian Federation the use of mobile telephones had been for-bidden during sittings.

68

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 191

Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini (Indonesia) asked what the total time had been for establishment of the “digital chamber” in particular relating to staff training.

Mr Won-Jong Sang said that the total cost of the system had been about $34 million. The system had been financed by a leasing agreement and the choice of the contractor had been at the end of an open and trans-parent tender process.

He confirmed that in Korea the use of mobile telephones was also prohib-ited within the Chamber.

In response to the question of Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini, he said that two months of preparation had been required with two months for installation and two months for testing system — 6 months in all.

As far as security of the system was concerned, he said that the terminals which the Members of Parliament had access to were not computers but simple terminals linked to and controlled by a central server with dual secur-ity.

Mr Marc Bosc (Canada) emphasizing the rapidity of technological ob-solescence, asked about the estimate for modernization or replacing of the equipment. He wondered, on the basis of what Mr STANESCU had said, about the problem of Members who moved around the Chamber and who therefore were no longer in contact with the device placed under their seat. He asked about the length of time of the “window” during which Members of Parliament could vote. What happened if Members of Parliament were not in the Hemicycle?

Mr Manuel Alba Navarro (Spain) thought that it was always possible to install digital equipment in a building, even an old one, and that the mat-ter was basically one of political will.

He put a series of questions: were all records of decisions kept digitally; could Members of Parliament still move motions on the basis of paper; could a Member of Parliament have access to his personal computer from his in-formation station; and could Members of Parliament bring their own com-puters into sittings and use them?

Mr Won-Jong Sang answering Mr Marc BOSC first, said that the Cham-ber was very aware of problems linked to the speed of technological obsol-escence but he thought that taking into account the inbuilt conservatism of Parliaments that there would be no basic changes to bring into effect in the short term.

Whenever a Bill was put to the vote, the devices under the seats of Mem-bers allowed the Speaker to know whether a quorum was present or not.

In response to the questions from Mr Manuel Alba Navarro, he said that the information system allowed immediate publication of all documents. In order to strengthen public interest in parliamentary debates, these were broadcast.

Members of Parliament who suffered from physical handicap (for ex-ample, those who were blind) could use specially adapted equipment. Natur-ally, it remained possible to use paper for contributions but these contribu-tions would be circulated digitally.

69

Const. Parl. Inf. 56 (2006), 19170

THE OFFICE AND POWERSOF THE SPEAKER/PRESIDENT

—

General debate moderated by Mr Abdeljalil ZerhouniSecretary General of the House of Representatives (Morocco)

Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni (Morocco) spoke as follows:

1. CONTEXTThe Moroccan Parliament is bicameral. It consists of the House of Repres-

entatives elected by direct suffrage for a 5 year legislative term and the House of Councillors (Senate) elected by indirect suffrage for a mandate of 9 years with one-third renewable every 3 years.

The first parliament was set up in 1963 in the first years of independence and following the adoption of the first Constitution of the country in 1962.

Although it was bicameral at first, the Moroccan parliament consisted only of one House from 1970 to 1997, with one-third of deputies elected by indir-ect suffrage.

The Constitution has been amended on different occasions. The last amendment goes back to 1996. The rules of procedure and the organic law determine the composition, the role, the prerogatives and the functioning of each House.

Members of the House of Representatives are elected for a five year term by direct universal suffrage. It should be noted that today for the 2002–2007 legislature, the House of Representatives includes 35 women deputies out of 325 members.

Members of the House of Representatives may come from parliamentary groups. The number of deputies required to form the basis of a group ac-cording to the rules of procedure shall be 20 or more members.

The House of Representatives sits for two sessions a year: the autumn session and the spring session. The duration of each session cannot be less than 3 months. The House of Representatives may also convene in an ex-traordinary session during the recess period. His Majesty the King makes a speech at the opening of each legislative year, on the second Friday of Octo-ber of each year.

The Board, the governing body of the House, is directed by the Speaker who is elected by secret ballot at the beginning and the middle of the legis-lative term. The other members of the board are elected for one year, on the basis of the principal of proportional representation of parliamentary groups.

The Presidents of the groups meet on the initiative of the Speaker in a Council of Presidents which also includes the Deputy Speakers, the Chair-men of the Standing Committees as well as a representative of the Govern-ment. The Council of Presidents discusses the agenda, the work of the com-mittees and delivers its decision concerning the agenda of the House.

There are six standing committees in the House of Representatives. Each committee deals with specific sectors of activities: (Interior, Decentralization and Infrastructures - Finance and Economic Development - Productive Sec-tors - Social Sectors - Justice, Legislation and Human Rights - Foreign Affairs and National Defence and Islamic Affairs).

2. FUNCTION AND POWERS OF THE SPEAKERThe Constitution, the rules of procedure and the organic law of the House

of Representatives define and specify the function and the powers of the Speaker.

No fewer than six articles of the Constitution refer to the function and the role of the speaker of the House of Representatives.

In the rules of procedure, many articles refer to the same functions and powers.

Thus the relation of the Speaker of the House of Representatives to the monarchical institution, its relation with the Government, the second House (Senate), the Constitutional Council and the legal Institution are well defined. His function and prerogatives as regards the management and functioning of the bodies of the House, the legislative field, the field of the control of government and parliamentary diplomacy field are also well defined.

Article 37, title III of the Constitution which deals with Parliament lays down that “The President of the House of Representatives shall first be elec-ted at the beginning of parliamentary term, then during the April session of the third year thereof for the remaining period.”

Articles 12 to 15 of the rules of procedure specify the mode of this elec-tion.

Without seeking to present the competencies and the powers of the speaker of the House of Representatives in an exhaustive way, we can point out his principal prerogatives while distinguishing between those functions and powers which cannot be delegated, in which the Speaker cannot be sub-

stituted for or represented and those functions and powers which can be delegated and in which the Speaker can be substituted for by a Vice-Speaker, a delegation of Members of Parliament… etc.

The rules of procedure are very clear on this subject: article 15 lays down that in case of vacancy for a particular reason of the Speaker's post until the election of a new Speaker one of the Vice-Speakers, according to the order of precedence, shall carry out all his duties, except for those laid down in the Constitution in Articles 21, 35, 71, 79 and 81.

Specific competencies of the speaker (not able to be delegated or carried out by a substitute)— The Speaker of House of Representatives is a member of the Regency

Council which assumes during the King’s minority the powers and constitutional rights of the crown, with the exception of those pertaining to the revision of the constitution. (Article 21 of the Constitution). It should be noted that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, just as the president of the House of Councillors, sits in the Regency Council ex-officio. It is the same for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the President of the Rabat and Sala Ulama Council (of scholars). The ten other dignitaries of the Regency Council are appointed by the King’s intuitu personae.

— The King consults the Speaker of the House of Representatives before declaring the state of emergency «should the integrity of the national territory ever be under threat or should any event interrupt the course of action of the constitutional institutions, the King shall after consulting with the President of the House of Representatives, the President of the House of Councillors, the Chair of the Constitutional Council, and addressing the nation, have the right to declare a state of emergency by Royal Decree» (Article 35 of the Constitution).

— The King consults the Speaker of the House of Representatives before dissolution of either House or both: «After consulting with the Presidents of both Houses and the Chair of the Constitutional Council, and after addressing the nation, the King may decree the dissolution of either House or both» (Article 71 of the Constitution).

— The Speaker of the House of Representatives appoints 3 members of the constitutional Council after consultation of the groups just as the President of the second House also does. His Majesty the King appoints the six other members of the Constitutional Council (Article 79 of the constitution).

— The Speaker of the House of Representatives may refer laws to the Constitutional Council before their promulgation, the same as his Majesty the King, the Prime minister and the President of the second House (Article 81 of the Constitution).

Competencies of the Speaker which can be delegated — Competencies as regards the functioning of the House of

Representatives and its bodies: The Speaker convenes and chairs the meeting of the House, whether

the plenary, the board or the Presidents Council's meetings. Contacts and foreign relations of the House are carried out via the

Speaker. The correspondence of the House with the Government are

addressed by the Speaker to the Prime Minister (Article 11, 19 and 50 of the rules of procedure).

— The Speaker transmits the rules of procedure at the moment of their adoption or amendment by the House to the Constitutional Council which comes to a conclusion about their conformity with the constitution.

— The Speaker may convene the Standing Committees to meet during the sessions or in the recess (Article 36 of the rule of procedure).

— The Speaker receives at the beginning of the first session of each legislative year the list of each group which includes the name and signature of its members and bearing the name of its president and its chosen name.

— The group lists are communicated to the Speaker 48 hours before the opening of the meeting reserved for the announcement of the groups.The Speaker of the House announces the constitution of the groups and makes public their chosen names and the names of their leaders who speak on their behalf. These lists along with the names of deputies who are not members of any group are published in the Official Bulletin by the Speaker. (Article 25 of the rule of procedure).

— The Speaker of the House must be informed of any modification in the constitution of a group under the signature: of the interested representatives in case of resignation. of the president of the group in case of dismissal. of the president of the group and the interested representative in

case of adherence or a political alliance.All these modifications are published in the Official Bulletin and in the Internal Bulletin of the House (Article 27 of the rules of procedure).

Mrs Lulama Matyolo-Dube (South Africa) presented the following contribution:

From as far back as 17th century the Office of the Speaker has had its role and powers clearly defined. This started with the initial revolt of the people who revolted against the Kings demanding a say before taxation. From that

unfortunate incident the role of the Speaker crystallised as the spokesper-son of “the people” against the King.

The Office of the President of the Upper House is a latter development. As it stands now it cannot be easily traced back to the original Speaker’s Office. However, through convention — from practice — it assumed the powers of the Office of the Speaker. The slight difference in the two offices is observed in countries where the President of the Senate immediately acts as Presid-ent in his absence. This is a remnant of the origins of the Upper House and the fact that originally its members were nominated / appointed by the King to represent the interests of the Lords. It should, however, be noted that these have since evolved to be more or less the same. In this short expose I will deal with only 4 of these. In this paper the word Speaker will be used for both the Speaker, the Chairperson of the National Council of President of the Senate.

– Speaker as the spokesperson of the HouseSpeaker’s Office is the embodiment of the power of the House. The

Speaker is entrusted with the responsibility of articulating the position of the House. In doing so she is expected to be as non-partisan as is humanly pos-sible. She must articulate the agreed position of the House. If there is no consensus she has to state the position and register the minority view.

In this capacity a lot of respect attaches to the Office of the Speaker. For instance, the Speaker’s ruling on procedural matters is not challenged in the House. Members are free to approach her in chambers. When this happens and she deems it necessary she either reports to the House or revisits and changes her ruling after consultations with both Procedure and the Law Of-fice.

– The Speaker as the custodian of ethics and dignity of the HouseBefore the Committee on Ethics was established or when that committee

cannot meet for some parliamentary reasons the Speaker is empowered to deal with issues of ethics. For instance, when a committee is being sponsored financially the Speaker is expected, in the absence of the Com-mittee on Ethics, to evaluate the offer and make a ruling as to whether that sponsorship should be accepted or not. Her major consideration is whether a financial relationship between that sponsor does not have the potential of embarrassing parliament later on.

In maintaining the dignity of the House the Speaker has the power to deal with whoever brings the House into disrepute. If it is somebody violating the dignity of the House, the Speaker can actually have the person chucked out of the House through the help of the Sergeant-at-Arms or the Usher of the Black Rod.

– The Speaker and the Chairperson as Treasury of ParliamentWith the introduction of the Public Finance Management Act the Speaker

and the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) perform the functions of National Treasury with respect to Parliament. This is as a result

of observance of separation of powers. Parliament cannot be subjected to a government department, to ensure that its Constitutional position and func-tion of oversight over government is not compromised by being dependent on a government department for its budget and control thereof. In pursuit of this principle of independence of Parliament, South Africa established a Par-liamentary Oversight Authority. Part of the responsibility of this body – which is co-chaired by the Speaker and the Chairperson – is to scrutinize the report of the Auditor-General on the financial management of Parliament.

– The Speaker and the Chairperson of the NCOP as Strategic Political Man-agers of Parliament

An idea was born and accepted the Parliament RSA should not be reactive in dealing with issues both internally and internationally. This is in the spirit of transforming the institution to ensure it is relevant to the expectations of the current electorate and international community. This office has therefore been tasked with the responsibility of leading Parliament RSA in its trans-formation endeavours.”

Mrs Adelina de Sá Carvalho (Portugal) presented the following contri-bution:

The President of the Assembly of the Republic of Portugal has a number of functions that are established in the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly of the Republic and the Organic Law of the Assembly of the Republic, but has also other functions that are not clearly laid down and are part of the gen-eric functions of representation, either national or international.

Therefore, in order to better understand the functions and the resources available to the President of the Assembly of the Republic, the following areas should be considered: – Status; – Election and term of office; – Substi-tution; – Responsibilities in relation to the proceedings of the Assembly of the Republic; – Responsibilities in relation to Members of Parliament; – Re-sponsibilities in relation to other bodies that exercise sovereign power; – Presidency of other internal bodies of the Assembly of the Republic; – Re-sponsibilities in relation to the administration of the Parliament; – National and international representation and – Cabinet of the President.

– StatusThe President of the Assembly of the Republic represents the Parliament,

co-ordinates its proceedings and exercises authority over all its staff. On the other hand, as the second leading figure in the hierarchy of the Portuguese State, the President of the Assembly of the Republic substitutes the Presid-ent of the Republic when he is absent or unable to perform his functions.

– Election and term of office

The President is elected in the second plenary sitting of the Parliament after the elections. In the first plenary sitting the mandates of all the Mem-bers of Parliament are checked and in the second plenary sitting the Presid-ent of the Assembly of the Republic is elected by an absolute majority of all the Members in full exercise of their office. Traditionally, in Portugal there is only one candidate to the office of President, designated by the parliament-ary group of the party with the highest number of votes in the elections and usually elected by a vast majority of Members of Parliament.

As regards the term of office, the President is elected for the period of the legislature, which lasts for four years, except in case of dissolution of the Parliament.

– SubstitutionThe President is substituted by the Vice-Presidents. In Portugal, the Parlia-

ment has four Vice-Presidents, elected by the four major parties that hold seats therein. The Vice-Presidents chair the plenary sittings on a rotating basis when the President is absent or temporary unable to perform his func-tions.

The Vice-Presidents not only substitute the President, but also advise the President on the performance of his functions and represent the Parliament at his request.

– Responsibilities in relation to the proceedings of the Assembly of the Re-public

As regards the proceedings of the Assembly of the Republic, and to high-light the most relevant responsibilities, the President represents the Parlia-ment, schedules and chairs plenary sittings, establishes the order of busi-ness once the Conference of Parliamentary Group Representatives is consul-ted, admits legislative initiatives and petitions, submits them to the compet-ent parliamentary committees, promotes the formation of international par-liamentary delegations, stimulates the work of parliamentary friendship groups, oversees staff in the Assembly’s service and ensures that the Rules of Procedure and the Assembly’s decisions are complied with.

These responsibilities are the core of the President’s activity; the func-tions of representation are not specifically laid down and have a special im-portance in the international area.

– Responsibilities in relation to Members of ParliamentRegarding the Members of Parliament, the President has the responsibility

to rule on justifications presented by Members who fail to attend plenary sit-tings, to rule on requests for substitution and to follow up motions and re-quests that Members submit to the Government.

– Responsibilities in relation to other bodies that exercise sovereign power

In his capacity as representative of the Parliament, the President estab-lishes relations with the other bodies that exercise sovereign power, in par-ticular the President of the Republic and the Government. In this context, the President has the responsibility to send the texts approved for enact-ment and the international treaties approved to the President of the Repub-lic (in Portugal, the President of the Republic can politically veto the texts approved by the Parliament).

In his relation with the Government, the President has the responsibility to notify the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister of the results of votes on motions of confidence or no confidence and, by agreement with the Government, to schedule plenary sittings at which members of the Gov-ernment elucidate the Members of Parliament regarding their activity. The Government is represented at the Assembly of the Republic by the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs.

– Presidency of other internal bodies of the Assembly of the RepublicIn addition to representing the Assembly of the Republic and chairing

plenary sittings, the President chairs and coordinates the work of two in-ternal bodies of the Parliament:— The Conference of Parliamentary Group Representatives, wherein the

order of business of plenary sittings is set and the main decisions for the operation of the Parliament are taken – the Government, represented by the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, also participates in this Conference;

— The Conference of Parliamentary Committee Chairmen, which was recently established and is aimed at coordinating the committees’ work in order to prevent the overlapping of matters or initiatives, and drawing up an annual report on the degree to which laws are being executed.

– Responsibilities in relation to the administration of the ParliamentRegarding the aforementioned responsibilities, the President is the su-

preme body of the Parliament’s administration and has the responsibility, among others, to authorise expenditure, after consulting the Board of the Assembly of the Republic.

These responsibilities can be delegated to the Board of the Assembly of the Republic — which is composed of a representative of each Parliamentary Group, the Secretary-General and a representative of parliamentary staff — and, in particular, to the Secretary-General, who actually coordinates the services and presents most of the proposals for expenditure, recruitment of staff and others related to parliamentary administration.

– National and international representationAs referred above, the President represents the Parliament in every situ-

ation, either in Portugal or abroad, and is responsible for heading all the del-egations of the Assembly of the Republic to which he himself belongs.

The international activity of the President of the Portuguese Parliament is similar to the activity of almost every other President and includes the parti-cipation in multilateral conferences taking place in the European context and in the Parliaments of the Portuguese-Speaking Countries, bilateral visits abroad organized with other Parliaments, and the reception of foreign entit-ies at the Assembly of the Republic, such as Heads of State, Presidents of Parliaments and Prime-Ministers.

These functions, most of them not yet regulated, absorb a significant part of the agenda of the President of the Assembly of the Republic of Portugal.

– Cabinet of the PresidentIn order to perform all these activities and duly fulfil his responsibilities,

the President of the Assembly of the Republic has a Cabinet that can be composed of one head of cabinet, four advisers, three assistants and six secretaries. This maximum number of advisers, assistants and secretaries has not been reached in recent times.

The Cabinet staff, given the political nature of the appointment, termin-ates the service at the end of the term of office of the President or at any time upon his decision.

Mrs Georgeta Elisabeta Ionescu (Romania) presented the following contribution:

The Standing Orders of the Romanian Chamber of Deputies has been re-cently modified and published in the Official Journal, on 14 January 2006. The changes are made to clarify certain ambiguous aspects from the former Rules. There can also be identified some changes in the section related to the election of the President of the Chamber and the Standing Bureau.

After the legal setting up of the Chamber of Deputies, the new president of the Chamber of Deputies is elected, and then all the members of the Standing Bureau of the Chamber.

In conformity with the Standing Orders of the Chamber of Deputies, the president of the Chamber is also the president of the Standing Bureau, which also includes 4 vice-presidents, 4 secretaries and 4 quaestors.

The Standing Bureau is set up after the negotiations among the leaders of the parliamentary groups, by respecting the political configuration of the Chamber, such as it results from the setting up of the Parliamentary Groups.

In article 20 a new paragraph was introduced, which it stipulates that the position as President of the Chamber of Deputies ceases upon the resigna-tion, dismissal or loss of the capacity as Deputies.

In compliance with Article 21 of the Standing Orders, the president of the Chamber of Deputies is elected for the Chamber’s term of office, by secret ballot, with voting ballot, using ballot papers that must state the full names of all candidates’ Parliamentary Groups. Each parliamentary group may

make a single proposal only. The candidate who won the vote of the majority of the Deputies is declared President-elect of the Chamber of Deputies.

There is also the possibility in which, after two rounds, none of the can-didates has the vote of the majority of the Deputies. In that case new voting rounds are organized, following which president of the Chamber of Deputies shall be declared the candidate who gets the majority of votes of the present deputies, if the quorum stipulated under art. 67 under the Constitu-tion of Romania, republished, has been met.

The election of the vice-presidents, of the secretaries and of the quaes-tors who make up the Standing Bureau is done at the proposal of the Parlia-mentary Groups.

Excepting the President of the Chamber, all other members of the Stand-ing Bureau (the vice-presidents, secretaries and quaestors) are elected at the beginning of each ordinary session of the Chamber of Deputies.

In compliance with article 25 of the Standing Orders, the mandate of the President or any member of the Standing Bureau may be dismissed before the expiry of their term office, based on the votes of a majority of Deputies or at the proposal of the Parliamentary Group which has nominated him. The ballot is secret and is expressed using ballot papers for the President and balls for the election the other members of the Standing Bureau.

The president, whose dismissal has been requested, may not chair the meeting of the Standing Bureau or the plenary sitting in which the dismissal is being debated. If the proposal is approved by the plenum of the Chamber, the election of a new president will be organized.

All issues are discussed during the Standing Bureau’s sessions and de-cisions are taken by the Standing Bureau, following the vote of its member. For the transparency of the discussions, the debates in the Standing Bureau are recorded in official reports or in shorthand reports and published on the Chamber’s website. The deputies may consult the shorthand reports or may get a copy of them, except for the ones declared as confidential by the Standing Bureau, which may only be consulted.

The Standing Bureau may be convened at the request of the President of the Chamber of Deputies or at the request of minimum 4 of its members.

Article 33 of the Standing Orders of the Chamber of Deputies stipulates the powers and the duties of the president of the Chamber of Deputies, which are the following: i. to convene the Deputies in ordinary or extraordinary sessions; ii. to chair the plenary sittings of the Chamber of Deputies, with the man-

datory assistance of 2 Secretaries, and to ensure that order is being maintained during the debates, and that the provisions of the present Standing Orders are being complied with;

iii. to give the floor, to moderate the debate, synthesize the issues under debate, establish the voting order, state the matters put to the agenda and announce the result of votes;

iv. to chair the meetings of the Standing Bureau; v. to notify the Constitutional Court under the terms stipulated in art. 144

letter a), b) and c) in the Constitution of Romania, republished;

vi. to ensure that draft laws adopted or rejected by the Chamber of Depu-ties are immediately referred to the Senate, for debate, or, as the case may be, that the voted laws are referred to the President of Romania, for promulgation, within the lawful time limits;

vii. to represent the Chamber of Deputies in the internal and foreign rela-tions

viii. to present annual reports, in the plenary, on the way in which the Pres-ident’s funds have been used;

ix. to perform any other duties stipulated the present Standing Orders, as well as the assignments established by the plenum of Chamber of Deputies.

In several cases, the duties of the President (article 34) are carried out by the four vice-presidents, by rotation, at his request or in case of his unavail-ability, as well as other tasks given by the Standing Bureau.

Concerning the immunity, there are no paragraphs in the Standing Orders especially for the President of the Chamber of Deputies. It is stipulated that the Deputies enjoy parliamentary immunity from the issuing date of the proving certificate of election, under the condition of validation (Article 180). No Deputy can be remanded, arrested, searched or sent for penal or contra-ventional trial without the prior approval of the Chamber of Deputies and his hearing (Article 182). It is to the President that these requests for remand, arrest, search or regarding the possibility of being sent for penal or contra-ventional trial are addressed. When he solicits the approval of the Chamber of Deputies in this matter, the minister of justice must specify and motivate for which from the measures provided for in Constitution’s art. 69.

The President of the Chamber has the duty to inform the Deputies of the request, in a public sitting, after which he sends it, at once, to the Commit-tee for legal matters, discipline and immunities for examination, which com-mittee will establish by its report whether there are or there are not solid reasons to approve the request. The decision of the Committee is to be ad-opted by the vote of the majority of the Committee’s members within 30 days from the intimation. The ballot is secret.

The request together with the Committee’s report, will be submitted to the parliamentary group to which the respective deputy belongs. The group expresses its point of view regarding the request in a written report, within 30 days from the date of the intimation of the group.

In the case of the Deputies who do not belong to any parliamentary group, they may submit to the Standing Bureau their point of view with re-gard to the request.

The Committee’s report, together with the report of the parliamentary group is forwarded to the Standing Bureau and is submitted to the Chamber of Deputies for debate and approval. The Chamber of Deputies pronounces its opinion separately on each measure the approval of which is requested by the minister of justice, according to art. 69 in the Constitution.

Mr Constantin Dan Vasiliu (Romania) presented the following contri-bution:

There is no doubt that the function of Chamber President is the most im-portant, difficult and complex function in a Parliament.

Given the historical development of the parliamentary life in Romania, I will start by making a short reference to the Constitution of 1866 — marking the beginning of the modern period of parliamentary regime in my country — and to mention the followings most important differences comparing to the legal provisions in force today:— The internal structures of the Chambers were not constituted on the

basis of the political configuration of the Assemblies resulted from elections, provision introduced by the 1991 Constitution, as a measure of protection of the political minority.1

— The President was elected at the same time with the other members of the Standing Bureau, only for the period of a session and not for the period of a mandate as in the present.

At present, in Romania, the function of the President of the Senate is reg-ulated by two documents: the Constitution of Romania, republished (2003) and the Standing Orders of the Senate (2005).

1. THE ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATEAccording to the Constitution and to the Standing Orders of the Senate, at

present, the President is elected for the term of office of the Chamber, by secret ballot, with vote bulletins, on which are listed, in the decreasing order of the size of the parliamentary groups, the names and the surnames of all candidates proposed by the leaders of the parliamentary groups. Each par-liamentary group is allowed to submit only one proposal it should be men-tioned that, according to the Art. 16 paragraph 3 of the Constitution of Ro-mania republished, the political membership of the members of the Stand-ing Bureau shall reflect the political configuration of the respective Chamber as resulted following the elections.

According to the Standing Orders of the Senate, Art. 24, the candidate who receives, at the first scrutiny, the vote of the majority of Senators is de-clared the elected President of the Senate.

In case that none of the candidates receives the necessary number of the votes, a second tour of scrutiny is organized, with the participation of the first two candidates obtaining the greatest number of votes or, if the case be, of the candidate who got the first place and of all candidates situated on the second place at equal number of votes.

Following the second ballot, if the candidate on the first place didn’t ob-tained the vote of the Senator’s majority, new ballot tours are carried out according to the system already stated. The candidate receiving the vote of the majority of Senators is declared President of the Senate.

1. The Constitution of Romania of 1991 was changed and completed by the Law on the Revision of the Constitution of Romania 429/2003, approved by National Re-ferendum (Oct. 2003).

2. THE PREROGATIVES OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATEThe prerogatives of the President are stated by the Standing Orders of the

Senate. In carrying out of his duties the President is supported by the others members of the Standing Bureau: 4 Vice-presidents, 4 Secretaries and 4 Questeurs.

It is important to underline here that the President of the Senate — who is at the same time the President of the Standing Bureau and the only member of this structure elected for the entire period of the mandate — is respons-ible not only for the efficiency of the legislative activity but he also detains some distinct attributions individualizing him as a representative of the sen-ators.

Thus, according to the Standing Orders of the Senate, art 39, the Presid-ent has the following duties (prerogatives):i. to convene the Senate in ordinary and extraordinary sessions;ii. to preside the proceedings of the Senate and to ensure the complying

with the timetable and the agenda;iii. to give the floor, to moderate the debates, to synthesize the issues un-

der debate, to establish the vote order, to explain the vote significance and to announce the result of the vote;

iv. to ensure the maintenance of order during debates and the observance of the Constitution and of the Standing Orders;

v. to convene and to preside the Standing Bureau sittings;vi. to represent the Senate in its relationship with the President of Ro-

mania, the Chamber of Deputies, the Government, the Constitutional Court, and with other authorities and national or international institu-tions;

vii. to notify the Constitutional Court in accordance with the stipulations of Art. 146, a), b), c) of the Constitution of Romania, republished;

viii. to dispose of the President Fund, according to the law and in the limits of budgetary provisions;

ix. to approve the discount of expenses of the official delegations abroad;x. to approve indemnities for the persons employed as part-time staff and

the discount of expenses for the persons invited to the Senate accord-ing to the law;

xi. to annually present to the Standing Bureau the reports on the use of the President’s Fund;

xii. to carry out any other duties according to the law, to the present regu-lations or decided by the Senate.

As mentioned under item 2 e), given the President’s role in his double ca-pacity as the President of both the Senate and of the Standing Bureau, it is important to mention here some of the attributions of the Standing Bureau which I consider relevant for the subject in discussion. According to the Standing Orders of the Senate, the Standing Bureau has the following du-ties:

— to prepare and to ensure the conduct in good conditions of the proceedings of the Senate;

— to propose and to put on the agenda of the Senate the approval and/or the modification of the Standing Orders;

— to approve the Regulations of the Standing Committees; — to receive the bills or legislative proposals and to decide upon:

notifying the respective Standing Committees in order to draw up reports in case the Senate is competent to debate and to adopt the bill as the first notified Chamber, or in case the Senate is notified by the Chamber of Deputies;

transmitting them to the Chamber of Deputies, in the case the Chamber of Deputies is competent to debate and adopt them as the first notified Chamber, or following a decision of the Senate Plenary Sitting and with the approval of the Committee on Legal Affairs, Appointments, Discipline, Immunities and Validations;

— to order the distribution of bills, legislative proposals and of the reports of the Standing Committees to all Senators, as well as their publishing on the website of the Senate;

— to draw up the draft agenda and the program of the Senate sittings, following consultations with the leaders of the Parliamentary Groups, and with the Representative of the Government responsible for the relation with the Parliament and to order their publishing on the Senate website;

— to decide, following consultations with the leaders of the Parliamentary Groups, the total duration and the distribution of the floor takings during the political debates, as well the total duration and distribution of the floor takings during political declarations;

— to submit to the Senate’s approval the number and the names of the senators members of the delegations to international parliamentary organizations, based on the decisions negotiated by representatives of the Parliamentary Groups;

— to submit to the Senate’s approval its draft budget and the closing accounting of the budgetary exercise, to perform the internal financial accounting control, through the questeurs, and to take the appropriate measures related to these matters;

— to submit to the Senate’s approval the structure of its services;— to propose to the Senate the appointment or the revocation of the

Secretary General and of the Deputy Secretary General;— to approve the list of positions and the Regulations on Organization and

Functioning of the Services of the Senate;— to control the activity of the Services of the Senate;— to approve the regulations regarding the security and the access in the

Senate building;— to adopt decisions which are compulsory for Senators and for the

technical staff.

Beyond all mentioned above duties, having a neutral character from the political point of view, the President of the Senate (and of the Chamber of Deputies) fulfils some constitutional or legal competencies, having this time a political connotation. As for example:— The President of Romania may dissolve Parliament, following

consultations with the Presidents of both Chambers and with the leaders of the parliamentary groups, if no vote of confidence has been obtained to form a government within 60 days after the first request was made, and only after rejection of at least two requests for investiture.

— According to art.98 of the Constitution of Romania, republished, the President of the Senate ensures the interim of the presidential office.

— The President of the Senate may …..the Constitutional Court— The Presidents of the Chambers are invited together with the

representatives of the parliamentary groups at the consultations that the President of Romania may organize in exercising his mediation function (art 80 paragraph 2, The Constitution of Romania, republished).

In the same context of the attributions of the President of the Senate which are established by other legal provisions than the Standing Orders of the Chambers, I mention here art. 103, paragraph 3, of the Law on the or-ganization and the functioning of the Court of Accounts stipulating that its members are taking the oath in the front of the Presidents of the Chambers.

Finally I would like to underline that as far as the ceasing of the mandate of President of the Senate the same rule as for the other member of the Standing Bureau is applied. Thus, according to the Standing Orders of the Senate, art. 29, the term of office of President of the Senate, Vice-President, Secretary or Quaestor, ceases before the expiration of the mandate, follow-ing the lost of the Senator’s mandate, according to Art. 70, par. (2), the Con-stitution of Romania, republished, or to their resignation or revocation in ac-cordance with the Standing Orders. The proposal on revocation is submitted in writing, under the signature of the initiators, once in a session, and it is submitted to the Plenary sitting.

Mr Valentyn Zaichuk (Ukraine) presented the following contribution:

Powers of the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine are defined by the Constitution of Ukraine and parliamentary Rules. According to Article 88 of the Constitution of Ukraine “the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine elects from among its members the Chairman,… the First Deputy Chairman and Deputy Chairman …and recalls them”.

The Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine:i. presides at meetings;i. organizes the preparation of issues for consideration at the parliament-

ary meetings;ii. signs acts adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine;

iii. represents the Parliament in relations with other bodies of state power of Ukraine and with the bodies of power of other states;

iv. organizes the work of the staff of the Verkhovna Rada.The second part of Article 88 of the Constitution of Ukraine stipulates the

basic powers of the Chairman, which are further specified by the Rules of the Parliament.

Particularly, item 1 of the mentioned Article determines the powers of the Chairman to direct parliamentary sessions where he or she is obliged to en-sure observance of the norms of the Rules providing that regulations and work schedule are in place.

In compliance with the Rules of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine the Chair-man opens, closes, directs the work of sessions without prejudice and sus-pend them; submits draft laws, resolutions, and other regulations of the Verkhovna Rada for consideration; declares their full names, statutory word-ing and initiators of the submission; informs MPs about documents ad-dressed to the Verkhovna Rada. At sessions he or she reads out lists of MPs registered to speak; gives the floor to present a report (joint report), make a statement and names next speaker; put the issue to the vote, declares its results. The Chairman should provide equal opportunities for MPs to particip-ate in the debate of items and use all appropriate measures to maintain or-der at the session of the Verkhovna Rada.

Item 2 of the second part of Article 88 of the Constitution of Ukraine de-termines the powers of the Chairman as regards the preparation of issues for consideration at the meetings. It defines the powers of the Speaker to or-ganize the elaboration of the annual and future plans on draft law proceed-ings, convene and preside over consultations with the Chairmen of the Com-mittees, representatives of the deputies groups and factions, Coordination council to agree MPs’ positions as for the plan of work of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, draft agendas, schedule of plenary sittings, issues on the submission of draft laws for consideration of the Committees, deputies groups and factions, for scientific, legal and other expertise on the state of readiness of draft laws for consideration in the plenary.

Quite important is the power of the Chairman, defined by item 3, to sign the acts adopted by the Parliament, since this procedure confirms compli-ance of the acts with the decisions taken by the Verkhovna Rada. This power is supplemented with the authority provided for in the Rules to issue resolu-tions on the publication of the acts among from those, which need no sign-ing by the President.

The first part of Article 94 of the Constitution of Ukraine contains the pro-vision that sets out the need of signing the law by the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada and its immediate submission to the President. In terms of the constitutional practice the adoption of the draft law by the Parliament finishes only the consideration of the concrete legal act, which is signed by the Speaker. Though it does not finish the legal procedure since to become legally binding the draft must be signed by the President and there should be resolution on its publication.

According to the Rules of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine the texts of laws adopted by the Ukrainian parliament are finalized in the Administration of

the Verkhovna Rada and are signed by the Speaker within 5 days. After that the laws (together with the resolutions on bringing them into force) are sub-mitted for signing to the President.

The powers of the Speaker as regards the representation of the Ukrainian parliament in relations with other bodies of state power of Ukraine and with the bodies of power of other states stipulated by item 4 of Article 88 of the Constitution of Ukraine testify to the quite high rank of the Speaker in the hierarchy of senior officials of the state and his or her important role in polit-ical life of the country. The Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada maintains inter-action of the Parliament with the President, executive branch, judiciary, the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, local self-governing bodies and NGOs.

The Speaker proposes to the Parliament for election or appointment can-didacies of public officials in accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine, laws of Ukraine and Rules of the Verkhovna Rada.

In conformity with the item 5 of Article 88 of the Constitution of Ukraine the Speaker organizes the work of the staff of the Parliament. The Chairman determines the numerical composition of structural organs of the Adminis-tration within the limits of expenditures, ensures compliance of the staff with the schedule of work and controls its activities, makes submission to the Verkhovna Rada on nomination and dismissal of the Secretary General and submissions to the Secretary General on nomination and dismissal of Deputies of Secretary General, approves Regulations on the Administration of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, document control, issues instructions to the Secretary General and employees of the Administration.

Apart from the constitutionally established powers, the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine exercises duties as the leader of the Parliament related to the normal functioning of the Parliament as one of the highest bodies of state power. In accordance with the Rules of the Parliament the Speaker organizes preparation of the budget of the Verkhovna Rada and submits it to the Parliament for consideration, manages funds allocated to the Parliament from the state budget, gives instructions on the use of premises of the Verkhovna Rada; submits to the Parliament detailed written report on the expenses for the previous year and on their compliance with the cost sheet of the expenses. At least once a year the Speaker submits re-port to the Verkhovna Rada on his activities, organization of work of the Par-liament and its bodies, legal framework, oversees the fulfillment of official duties by the First Vice Speaker, Vice Speaker and Chairmen of the parlia-mentary committees.

Privileges and immunities in the ParliamentNational deputies are guaranteed parliamentary immunities. National

deputies are not legally liable for the results of voting or for statements made in Parliament and its bodies, with the exception of liability for insult and defamation. National deputies of Ukraine shall not be held criminally li-able, detained or arrested without the consent of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (Article 80 of the Constitution of Ukraine, item 5 of Article 10 of the Law of Ukraine “On the status of the people’ deputy of Ukraine”).

Mr Xavier Roques (France) said that the powers of the Speaker of the National Assembly in France were very similar to those of the Speaker of the House of Representatives in Morocco. The Speaker of the National Assembly was elected for the length of the Parliament, which gave him a particular le-gitimacy in comparison with all the other types of parliamentary authorities (Deputy Speakers, members of the bureau, Chairmen of Committees), who were re-elected each year — even if often this re-election was purely formal.

The Speaker was consulted if the Chamber was dissolved, and if the ur-gent procedures provided for in article 16 of the Constitution were put into application, he could refer the matter to the Constitutional Council and nom-inate part of the membership.

The Speaker also played an important role in representing Parliament, as much within the country as internationally. It was thus very often the case that official representatives of foreign States (Heads of State, Prime Minis-ters, Speakers etc) travelling through Paris would come to meet him. It might even be regarded as an obligation — with the Ministry of Foreign Af-fairs frequently asking for guests to be received at the Assembly.

This representational function was also to be seen internally: all legal pro-cedures carried out in respect of the National Assembly were done in the name of its representative, that is the Speaker. On the other hand, if the Na-tional Assembly started legal action, in theory the Speaker brought the mat-ter before the judge — even if, in practice, it was often the quaestors who were the originators of the action.

The Speaker had important police powers, internally — sanctions against Members of Parliament, regulation of traffic within the Assembly — and ex-ternally. No police or military authority could enter the Assembly without his permission — a protection which naturally enough operated within the pre-cincts of the historic building but which had been extended to all its build-ings, even if only rented. On the other hand, the Speaker could require the intervention of the armed forces or the police — a general was attached to the Speaker of the National Assembly to ensure a link with the Ministry of Defence.

The Speaker nominated people to many bodies, of varying importance.The Speaker presided over sittings (alternately with Deputy Speakers),

the Conference of Chairmen (which met every week and fixed the Orders of the Day for the Chamber) and the Bureau. He received various communica-tions, internal papers (resignations of Members of Parliament, requests for lifting parliamentary immunity, candidacies for committees, etc), he summoned the committees for their initial meetings, etc.

The quaestors were a French particularity. The quaestors were responsible for managing the budget and administration of the Assembly. This fre-quently caused delicate problems in the relations between the Speaker and the quaestors, for example in security matters: although the Speaker de-cided the rules relating to security, the quaestors nonetheless were the au-thorities which carried out the rules (issuing passes, tickets for sittings, etc).

Mrs Hélène Ponceau (France) said that the Speaker of the Senate had powers which were comparable to those of his colleague in the National As-sembly. In addition, the Speaker of the Senate could be called to be interim President of the Republic. Otherwise, the Speaker of the Senate was not the only one to be elected for three years, after each senatorial election: the six Deputy Speakers, the three quaestors and the 12 secretary members of the Bureau were also elected for a similar term. In the daily exercise of their re-spective duties the working relationship between the Speaker and the quaestors was on a rather different basis, more equal, in the Senate than in the National Assembly.

Mr Hafnaoui Amrani (Algeria) thought that the Algerian Parliament and the Moroccan Parliament had many characteristics in common. In Al-geria as in France, the Speaker of the Council of the Nation could be re-quired to be interim President of the Republic in cases of inability to carry out duties, death or resignation of the President pending an election.

He wanted to know whether the two Chambers might be able to meet jointly. If so, who summoned such a session, the Speaker of the House of Representatives or that of the House of Councillors, and who presided? In addition, who transmitted bills which had been agreed to by Parliament to the Prime Minister?

Mr Michael Pownall (United Kingdom) said that in the United King-dom the House of Lords was soon going to elect its own Speaker for the first time in six hundred years. Until then, the Lord Chancellor had been the head of the judiciary, playing a secondary role as Speaker of the institution.

The Government had reformed the role of the Lord Chancellor, taking away from him the duties of Speaker and inviting the House to administer it-self henceforth. The new Speaker would preside over sittings, would advise the House and would have several supplementary powers in comparison with his predecessor, in particular in relation to urgent questions, represent-ation of the House internally and externally and explaining the role of the House to the wider public.

Candidates for the office had to be nominated three weeks in advance of the vote on all the candidates which would have only one round and which would be a secret ballot.

There had been debate about the amount of pay for the Speaker. It had been decided to fix it at the level of pay obtained by the holder of a minis-terial office. It had also been decided that although the Speaker would wear robes, he would no longer have a wig.

Mr Mamadou Santara (Mali) said that he had found many similarities between Morocco and the situation in Mali. Nonetheless, there were some differences, in particular relating to the Speaker's own powers which could not be delegated. In Mali, it was necessary to note the duty of external rep-resentation of the institution or the right to take legal proceedings in the name of the institution, which had a legal personality.

The Speaker of the National Assembly of Mali also had an extensive power of nomination — for example, three members of the Constitutional Court or a member of the Superior Council on Communication. He also summoned the High Court of Justice for its initial meeting in the course of

which it had to select its own Chairman — a strategic power to the extent that the constitution of the Court allows it to start its activities, namely to pursue, where necessary, elected Members whose behaviour is doubtful.

He asked Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni what the reasons were for changing the Speaker of the Chamber in the middle of the legislative period and whether the involvement of the parliamentary institution in selection of members of organizations outside Parliament did not have the effect of reinforcing their democratic legitimacy.

Mrs Adelina de Sá Carvalho (Portugal) asked Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni if there was a hierarchy of the Deputy Speakers in the House of Representat-ives.

Mrs Jacqueline Biesheuvel-Vermeijden (Netherlands) said that the present Speaker of the Second House had been elected in 2002 during the first session of the Chamber. He had been elected for the length of the Par-liament, namely four years, by secret ballot.

The Speaker represented the Chamber within the country and abroad, and could be represented in the course of his duties by the first Deputy Speaker. The Speaker was also consulted by the Head of State, Queen Beat-rix, when a new government was being formed.

He had various duties: he summoned the sittings, organized debates, de-termined the orderliness of amendments and requests for the establishment of Inquiry Committees. He presided over official sittings, was responsible for good order within the Chamber, he organized the visit of speakers, called them to speak and stopped them from speaking, etc.

She asked Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni what the powers were of the Bureau and the Council of Chairmen and whether the Speaker of the House could speak during legislative debates — this was possible, for example, in the Nether-lands, although the Speaker had to leave the Speaker’s chair.

Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni praised the wide-ranging debate on the question of functions and powers of the Speaker of a Parliamentary Assembly.

Turning first to Mr Xavier Roques, he confirmed that the Speaker of the House of Representatives was also empowered to take legal proceedings in its name — in the same way as he represented the Assembly abroad.

In reply to Mr Hafnaoui Amrani, he said that joint meetings of the two Houses were not provided for in their rules, except for the opening sitting of each legislative session. In those cases, the sitting of the two Houses jointly was presided over by His Majesty the King.

As far as legislative procedure was concerned, Bills were examined by the House of Representatives, then sent to the House of Councillors, then sent to the Prime Minister. It was possible for a Second Reading to take place in the House of Representatives, if the House of Councillors wanted to amend the Bill.

In reply to the questions from Mr Mamadou Santara, he said that Morocco was a constitutional monarchy and that the basic power of nominating ap-pointments belonged to the Moroccan sovereign.

The question of the mandate of the Speaker, which was interrupted in the middle of the legislative period, was the subject of debate. Some requests

had been made to amend the Constitution and allow election of a Speaker for the entire period of the Parliament. The term limit of a year for member-ship of the Bureau also sometimes raised practical difficulties.

In response to Mrs Adelina de Sá Carvalho, he said that there was a hier-archy of the eight Deputy Speakers, which was designed to reflect the polit-ical balance.

Turning to Mrs Jacqueline Biesheuvel-Vermeijden, he said that the Bureau had the responsibility for management and functioning of the House whereas the Conference of Chairmen essentially met to decide the Orders of the Day for the work in the plenary session.

The Speaker could give his opinion in the course of debates on legislation, although he remained in his place when he did so.

Mr Marc Bosc (Canada) asked for details about the nature of the “con-sultations” carried out by the King.

Mrs Doris Katai Katebe Mwinga (Zambia) asked what happened in relation to the exercise of the powers of the Speaker which could not be del-egated in cases where he was unavailable.

Mrs Lulama Matyolo-Dube (South Africa) asked Mr Michael Pownall for details on the powers of the new Speaker of the House of Lords. Mr Ma-madou Santara had referred to the submission of a case before the High Court by the Speaker: was this principle compatible with the true separation of powers?

In South Africa, although many rules had been borrowed from Westmin-ster, new developments had come about. Thus a new law relating to parlia-mentary immunity gave the Speaker the responsibility for ensuring the pro-tection of elected Members and the buildings: he was able to engage whatever police resources were necessary to ensure their safety.

The Speaker was, in addition, the spokesman of the Assembly: he repres-ented the institution and it was he who took legal proceedings, spoke on the name of the House and not as a party member, and was the guardian of the dignity of the House and parliamentary propriety — these questions formerly being given to specialised offices.

The Speakers of the Houses were also the Treasurers of Parliament, apply-ing the principle of separation of powers. Parliament sent accounts to a par-liamentary scrutiny authority where reports of the accounting officers were presented and discussed.

Mr Karamet Husain Niazi (Pakistan) said that the system in Pakistan to a great extent followed the British model. Nonetheless, there was a spe-cific matter which probably had no equivalent elsewhere in the world: the Speaker could insist that a Member of Parliament should take part in a de-bate, even if he was detained in the course of investigations or as a result of criminal conviction.

In addition, the Speaker of the National Assembly could summon a ses-sion at the request of at least a quarter of the members of the Assembly. He presided over the joint meetings of the two Houses in Congress. He could substitute for the Speaker of the Senate in his absence. He remained at his

post after dissolution of the National Assembly until his successor was sworn in and took up his duties. He selected the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr Nanborlor F. Singbeh (Liberia) said that the system in Liberia had been bicameral since 1947 and article 8 of the Constitution (as amended in 1956) laid down that the legislative function was given to the two separate assemblies, the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The Senate was presided over by the Vice President of the Republic, in which task he was assisted by the pro tempore Speaker of the Senate, who was elected by his colleagues. The Speaker of the House was also elected by his peers.

Mr Ravi Kant Chopra (India) wondered about the consultation with the Speaker of the House of Representatives in Morocco in cases of urgency. In India a state of emergency was decreed by the President after discussions with the members of the Government, with the agreement of Parliament be-ing required within a month (on the basis of a resolution voted for by the two Houses).

Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni in reply to the questions from Mr Marc Bosc and Mr Ravi Kant Chopra, said that the expression “the King consulted” meant that an opinion was given to the King by the Speaker of the House — in other words this meant a decision.

Mr Mamadou Santara (Mali) replying to Mrs Lulama Matyolo-Dube, said that the current constitution of Mali (agreed in 1992) included a section entitled “on judicial powers” — and not, as before, “on judicial authority”: the difference might seem negligible but in fact marked a desire to establish a clear separation between the other powers under the Constitution and ju-dicial independence.

The Supreme Court was at the head of the judicial system which was di-vided into an administrative section, a judicial section and a public accounts section. The High Court of Justice was established under the Constitution and was made up of nine elected Members who were chosen by their peers and they alone had the power to judge the President of the Republic in cases of high treason as well as any ministers guilty of failings in the exer-cise of their public duties.

THE ROLE OF PARLIAMENTSAND PARLIAMENTARIANS IN PROMOTING RECONCILIATION IN SOCIETY AFTER CIVIL

STRIFE

—

General debate moderated by Mr Hafnaoui AmraniSecretary General of the Council of the Nation (Algeria)

Mr Hafnaoui Amrani (Algeria) presented the following communication on: The role of Parliaments and parliamentarians in promoting reconciliation in society after civil strife — the Algerian experience:

Algeria had lived through a difficult period which had lasted over a dec-ade with many victims (over one hundred and fifty thousand deaths, thou-sands of orphans, and damage to the Algerian economy estimated at one billion dollars). The country had successfully survived this testing time thanks to the patriotism and the sacrifice of the army, the public, the secur-ity forces, and those patriots who, patiently and with determination, had been able to organize national resistance.

The state had put in effect various legal mechanisms in order to encour-age those who had revolted against it to give up violence and to express their political will within a democratic framework.

The concept of national reconciliation was not new in Algeria.There had been serious attempts from 1995 to reason with those who had

taken up arms against the State and society in general.These had had only partial success but nevertheless they had been im-

portant because several terrorists had accepted the lenient gesture made by the authorities and had surrendered. This gradual approach which had re-lieved much tension had been followed up by a law on bringing about civil

harmony in July 1999. In addition, the Charter on National Reconciliation granted freedom from criminal process to members of the armed groups who gave up the armed struggle.

This had reduced the terrible plague of terrorism and had improved the underlying situation but definitely had not eliminated terrorism.

The Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation, the goal of which was to put an end to this national tragedy, had been approved by referendum on 29 September 2005 and had come into force in February 2006.

There had been a great deal of discussion and speculation about this Charter, in particular about its capacity to lead to concrete results and the debate had continued, because of the emotions which it had provoked, even after the President of Republic had promulgated the Charter.

As one might expect, the Charter had its fierce opponents among those who had been victims of the events as well as proponents, some of whom had also been victims.

A number of questions had been raised on behalf of civil society gener-ally, those in political life and those carrying out legal functions.

Between the disinterested support of some and sharp criticism of others opinions had varied and people had followed their own political views, either according to their party loyalty or their private convictions.

Some lawyers thought that it would not be possible to have reconciliation without having a duty towards the truth.

Human Rights NGOs had declared that the process ran the risk of legal-ising immunity for crimes against humanity and of depriving victims and their families of their right to justice, the truth and reparation and that it might undermine future prospects, in particularly in the area of human rights.

The Algerian Parliament had actively taken part in this long journey from the Law on Clemency of 1995 to the Charter for Peace and National Recon-ciliation passed by the Law on Civil Concorde (1999).

The Algerian Parliament had played its part each time important ques-tions for the Nation had arisen.

Several months before the referendum of 29 September 2005, those Members of Parliament who were aware that Algerian society had been weakened and deeply wounded by a decade of devastation and desolation showed leadership and a sense of direction and proportion in the way in which they travelled throughout the various towns in the country to explain to their constituents the contents of the Charter, its meaning and expected goals.

They did this both as Members of Parliament and as citizens who were fully engaged in the renewal process of society, convinced as they were of the solid foundation of the course which they were defending. They were not without feeling, of course, and put the interests of the country before all other considerations, knowing that this was the only possible way forward in the present situation and that it represented an opportunity without parallel to ensure the health of the nation.

The Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation received a massive vote in favour in the referendum of 29 September 2005 and a law was pro-mulgated when Parliament was not sitting with a view to its being presented and agreed to by the two Houses of Parliament at the start of the spring ses-sion, that is to say March 2006.

Immediately after its agreement, the greater part of the Members of Par-liament were engaged in meetings and round tables with the aim of explain-ing the objects of the Charter and to give reasons for the proposal of this law by the President of the Republic, namely: — putting into effect the provisions of the Charter for Peace and National

Reconciliation was an expression of the sovereign will of the Algerian people.

— putting into effect the determination of the Algerian people to complete the policy on peace and national reconciliation was indispensable for the stability and development of the Nation.

At present, i.e. barely 2 months after agreement of the law on reconcili-ation, Members of Parliament regularly went to their electoral districts:— organizing meetings with local authorities in charge of implementation

of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation; and— chairing public education meetings to explain the situation across the

country, the reasons for setting up the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation as well as the provisions in the law, the area of application and the expected procedures.

The peace and well being of citizens required reconciliation.Countering certain groups which recommended violence as a means of

controlling society, using Islam to lead them to give up violence and work in total openness and to support ideas and values based on democracy.

Some perceived the charter more as a diktat than a contribution to na-tional reconciliation because it contained nothing about essential concepts such as crimes against humanity and human rights and avoided mentioning State responsibility for many aspects of the tragedy.

Admittedly, the Charter allowed the authors of crimes involving torture and disappearances to benefit.

However, it did this in a spirit of appeasement of hearts and minds, know-ing that it was more urgent to rebuild the country, tortured by years of ter-ror, and to draw a line under such things by putting into effect all the provi-sions, in order to prevent any repetition of such evils, since the tragedy would not end simply with laying down weapons, if the economic and social war continued.

The adopted Charter could help to absorb the bitterness and pain of vic-tims and to teach them to live in peace together.

Nonetheless, the provisions aimed at excluding from the benefit of am-nesty “those judged to be guilty of or being accomplices in or the instigators of collective massacres, rapes or use of explosives in public places” and those preventing repeat offenders from profiting from measures of leniency should not be ignored; neither should those preventing any involvement in

political activity in any shape or form of those who had used religion to con-tribute to the national tragedy.

The Charter aimed to look after the social, psychological and material in-terests of victims to help them to heal their wounds, to forget their misfor-tune and to turn towards the future towards happier circumstances.

In addition, the legislators created further protection by laying down that “no one, in Algeria or abroad, was entitled to use the impact of the national tragedy to attack the institutions of the Algerian Republic, to weaken the State, to harm the standing of all the officials who have served it with dig-nity, or to tarnish the image of Algeria internationally”.

In this way citizens must live through this painful moment and not indulge in theoretical debates which would by no means serve the higher interests of the State.

At the risk of displeasing the victims and their families and of running up against the principles of certain international human rights organizations, Al-geria had chosen the way which appeared to it to be the best adapted for an exit from the lasting crisis, to make it possible for reconciliation to be re-in-forced.

This step was drawn from the traditions of the Algerian people based on its religion of tolerance and forgiveness.

Admittedly, it was not something which could from one day to the next heal the wounds undergone by the victims.

Its critics claimed that there was no national debate on the causes of this terrible tragedy and on the means of overcoming it.

However, such a debate in the current circumstances and where the wounds were still fresh and stability not yet achieved certainly would have lasted a long time and delayed the restarting of the economy and the estab-lishment of a secure situation. The country could not, in the current state of affairs, allow new political and social tensions.

If it were necessary to launch a series of trials, there would be thousands of them and with the procedure of the prosecutions, defence and appeals, several years would be necessary to lead to final judgement.

Admittedly, that appeared more logical in formal terms, but it was not reasonable to launch the country down that route at the cost of delaying its recovery. It was obvious that such a scenario would focus the attention of the whole country and even attract interest beyond our borders from where people might not be satisfied only to observe.

Admittedly, forgiveness required the recognition of fault and freedom to forgive or refuse forgiveness, and reconciliation was normally preceded by a judgement. But the situation did not make it possible to take such a step, which was considered impractical by the State authorities.

It was thus preferred, in the higher national interest, to turn the page and address true problems which were those of development, employment and other known social problems — a reasoned, intelligent exit from the situ-ation, which carried out a perfect compromise between the State and its wayward children — to some extent a family reconciliation.

In spite of all the criticism, the Charter on national reconciliation was a major asset in the current stage of national development.

In Algeria, the appalling demolition of the nation, the hell lived through by the people, were fed by years of basic populism and injustice. Terrorism and violence hardly had any difficulty with taking root, nourished as much by a radical Islamism as by the absence of political freedoms, social misery and the absence of future prospects for a young generation aspiring to modern-ity and to taking part in the country’s future.

The Algerians who sacrificed themselves for the rescue of their country had to be able to forgive in order to allow peace and progress, the more so as the authors of crimes and other morally culpable actions would in truth never be free, because they would remain captives of their conscience.

National reconciliation was the means which ensured transition towards another situation in which victims of both blind terrorism and the mistakes made by certain government officials in the particular context of this period and which could not be denied and the authors of these acts would have to rebuild together a life based on cohabitation, which was the only way of mending a society torn by fratricidal strife.

Some elements of the defence and security forces of the Republic, at one time or another, in the heat of action, in the face of the high threshold of vi-olence from devastating terrorist action, had been shaken, had lost their clarity of vision and allowed their feelings of revulsion and their sometimes legitimate anger to take precedence over the necessary legality which should have been a characteristic of their actions as representatives of law and order.

National reconciliation had to contribute towards pacifying the relations between people who up to then had been in conflict and which had para-lysed society — the after-effects would be difficult to erase and those in charge of the country were very conscious of this.

After this initial phase of explanation of the introduction of the Charter of National Reconciliation which was only in its early stage (2 months), the Al-gerian Parliament would follow closely its implementation and would use all legal means which enabled them to scrutinize and criticize any failure to take the process forward by way of:— written and oral questions to the relevant Ministers: Justice, Interior,

Defence;— scrutiny committees which would inform themselves at grass roots level

of the impact of reconciliation and to evaluate its implementation periodically;

— possible boards of inquiry if necessary and even interpellation of the Government.

It should be noted that barely 2 months after implementation of the Charter of National Reconciliation Members of Parliament were asked by cit-izens to denounce more than 5200 falsely claimed victims of the national tragedy who were discovered as having made claims to allowances with the complicity of local government officials.

Finally, introduction of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation initiated by the President of the Republic, which had been voted for massively by plebiscite (a participation rate of 79.76% — 97.38% Yes and 2.62% No) and voted for by Parliament, was a process which would take time and in which Parliament had an important role in educating, scrutiniz-ing and monitoring implementation with a view to identifying any failures in implementation while remaining in touch with the public and making propos-als to solve problems where necessary, because reconciliation was not an event but a long process as delicate as it was complex.

Mrs Lulama MATYOLO-DUBE (South Africa) presented the following contribution:

According to social scientists civil strife is some form of a social disease and I propose to premise my contribution on this notion. Like any disease any treatment can only be prescribed after a correct diagnosis of the cause of the symptoms presented by the patient. This in turn leads on a thorough investigation of the cause.

My starting point is that parliaments need first to understand the causes of conflicts in their countries and regions before they can decide what role to play as this will differ from country to country depending on what the cause of the conflict or civil strife was.

A renowned African scholar, (Mkandawire, 199:3), stated, “the historical construction of our nation states their ethnic mixture and their agrarian structures literary condemn us either to democratic rule or to ethnic viol-ence and military rule. It is obvious that democratisation cannot be imposed externally, since it entails not just a set of political access mechanisms, but also the full political participation by the people, the idea of citizenship. The major challenge in many conflict-ridden societies is to create a more inclus-ive political system.”

A classical example to cite her would be South Africa. South Africans had been divided into ethnic groups by the then Apartheid Regime at the time of Democracy in 1994. During the drafting of the Constitution this reality was acknowledged and faced as such. The Constitutional organization of the country is such that the two Houses of Parliament have each a clear Consti-tutional mandate. Summarised, the National Assembly runs the country, ex-pands South Africa’s international relations and takes care of the security of the country. The other House, the National Council of Provinces, is focussing on internal political stability of the country. It looks after provincial interest at national level and provides a forum for public consideration of issues. This platform is available to all provinces who all have equal votes in the House for all provincial (linguistic, cultural, economic, etc) to be raised thus provid-ing a mechanism for dealing with any possible ethnic differences in the par-liamentary context. This is to keep tabs on any disillusionment by any grouping and address it immediately.

Secondly, parliaments generally need to debate the notion of democracy to ensure as close a common understanding of what the term means as is

humanly possible. There seems to be as many interpretations of the term as are geographical areas, interests, and in some cases it is linked to the eco-nomic interests of some powerful countries.

Thirdly, parliaments generally and countries specifically should have a common understanding of the notion of each country’s own democratic right to determine who is going to rule it. Failure to do this results in pro-longed violence and chaos after civil strife. This is caused by the fact that the civil strife was created in the first instance by force and stopped by an even bigger force. The defeated party is not convinced that it was defeated fairly and will continue the fight.

Further, parliaments should exercise effective oversight over the use of the countries armies to ensure that they are used for the purpose for which they were constituted, i.e. the defence of the country.

In fact I would like to challenge the existence of ARMIES as against the Defence Forces. The Defence Force is meant, in South Africa, to defend the constitution of South Africa and as such although the President of South Africa is the Commander in Chief, he has to get the support of Parliament in deploying the Defence Force. He has to convince Parliament of the need to deploy the forces showing the constitutional interest or international obliga-tion which must be endorsed by the Constitution (Section 210). In this way whoever becomes President of South Africa knows he / she cannot deploy the forces except in the interests of the Constitution. This assumes Parlia-ment’s political will to effectively oversee executive action.

Further, in order for the Constitutional provisions to live beyond the paper on which they are written, the people need to be assisted at a psychological level to deal with the effects of the civil strife so that they can fully put the strife behind them and have faith in the future. A number of countries prefer to “get justice” by charging people who were responsible for atrocities. Re-tribution may work but it does not help the individual to deal with his own trauma hence the trend is a truth and reconciliation mechanism first then “justice” in the case of those guilty who do not want to take the option of truth and reconciliation mechanism.

A number of countries have outlawed the benefits of civil strife e.g. “black diamonds”. The question remains how much political will is there from par-liaments to actually oversee implementation of those laws. If there is no market for benefits of civil strife the strife itself will not be worth the effort and the human sacrifice.

Neighbouring Parliaments would endeavour not to support any of the fac-tions militarily thus forcing both sides to seek workable solutions to their problems. Regional Parliaments could make this part of the obligations of member states in the interests of regional stability.

Parliamentarians need to walk the talk of peace. An example of this in South Africa is a soccer match that was played by Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) and the ruling African National Congress (ANC) who had been ar-chrivals. This indicated to the followers that war was truly over. After this the two parties held joint rallied addressing their followers on the truce. There-after the level of violence was significantly reduced.

After civil strife a country is usually also economically embarrassed. Con-scious efforts should be made by parliamentarians to attract aid and invest-ment in order to both assist the poverty stricken to survive and also to provide an attractive alternative to civil strife – individual economic develop-ment. Although economic activity does not soothe the hurt, it does provide an alternative activity to focus on and thereby redirect the angry energies towards something positive.

In conclusion, it is my submission that there is no set formula for facilitat-ing reconciliation. Efforts should start by determining the cause of the civil strife, address that within the Constitution first, then with relevant legisla-tion. Thereafter the psyche of the people affected by the civil strife needs to be realigned to peace both with programmes and the parliamentarians themselves taking a lead in demonstrating that war is over and people must concentrate on redevelopment of their county and reconstructing their dev-astated lives.

Mr Abdeljalil Zerhouni (Morocco) presented the following contribu-tion:

The history of independent Morocco had been marked by a difficult period during the establishment of the institutions of the State with contests for power between the various parties and between the parties and monarchy — multi-party politics being a constant in the country.

Morocco gained its independence in 1956 without a war of independence but at the end of a national struggle undertaken by the national movement in liaison with the Monarchy. And the 50 years which followed had not been easy. The Monarchy, His Majesty Hassan II especially, successor of His Majesty Mohamed V, had had to face very difficult periods including two failed coups d’etat and attempted murders and had to control with firmness to settle the government and the institutions of the country.

Since 1990, with His Late Majesty Hassan II, Morocco had started to es-tablish itself as a State with the rule of law, democratic and modern, using as points of reference its civilised and cultural values, the principles of hu-man rights and basic freedoms as recognised internationally. It is this that has made certain political commentators note that Morocco took its origin in peaceful circumstances relative to those in most Arab or African countries.

Thus, once the reforms had been put in place, institutions were estab-lished to support respect for Human Rights and to bring about reconciliation between Moroccans and their past.

– Centre for documents, education and information on human rights It was set up with the assistance of the Office of the High Commission of

the United Nations for Human Rights and of the United Nations Develop-ment Programme. The centre educated people about human rights and ba-

sic freedoms, as well as collecting, producing and publishing documents rel-ative to this subject.

– Divane Al MadhalimAn institution charged with promoting intermediation between citizens

and public organizations. It is a kind of Moroccan ombudsman, the task of which is to ensure that public authorities observe the rules of equity, equal-ity and primacy of the law. This institution, which was aimed at reconciling differences between citizens and public organizations through extrajudicial means, has a principal role of examining complaints by those who thought themselves damaged by decisions or administrative acts regarded as illegal or unfair.

– Advisory Council on Human Rights (CCDH)Since its creation in 1990, the CCDH had played a crucial part in the pro-

motion of human rights in Morocco, the fight against all forms of illegality and tampering with the files of political prisoners and those relating to forced disappearances. Reorganized in 2001, the CCDH examined, in addi-tion to the questions which were sent to it by the Government, cases of viol-ations of human rights, the harmonization of national legislation with Inter-national Conventions, encouragement of development of human rights and development of international co-operation in this field.

On recommendations of the CCDH, an arbitration board had been created to regulate the cases of forced disappearances and arbitrary arrests. This authority had examined 5,227 requests for compensation, and up to Febru-ary 2003, had made over 4,000 final decisions, allocating to victims or their dependants, more than 100 million dirhams (approximately 10 million dol-lars).

– Justice and Reconciliation Authority (or National Commission on Truth, Equity and Reconciliation)

The Justice and Reconciliation Authority (IER) was established officially by His Majesty King Mohamed VI on 7 February 2004. In the speech made on this occasion, the Sovereign referred to the Authority as a historical event and entrusted important responsibilities to it by defining it as a commission on truth and justice.

The IER was made up of a President and 16 members of various parties, half coming from the CCDH, all united around the same objectives of protec-tion and promotion of human rights. It decided itself its rules, which were approved by Dahir (royal decree) on 10 April 2004 and were published in the official Bulletin of the Kingdom 12 April 2004. In these rules, the IER defined and listed the tasks which it had been given, the crimes which were within its mandate to examine and its working methods.

The IER had 23 months to examine one 43 year period, which was the ref-erence period covered by its mandate and which extended from the begin-ning of independence in 1956 to the date of approval by H.M. the King of the creation of the Independent Arbitration Authority in 1999. Its methods of ac-

tion included investigation, research, evaluation, arbitration and the presentation of recommendations and proposals for reforms. The investiga-tions related to serious violations of human rights which were of a system-atic and/or massive nature, having taken place during the above mentioned period and which included forced disappearance, arbitrary detention, tor-ture, sexual violence, infringement of the right to life, in particular resulting from the disproportionate use of force, and forced exile.

The IER proceeded to make a total evaluation of the process of dealing with the subject of forced disappearances and arbitrary detention, and un-dertook research and dialogue with the authorities, victims, their families or their representatives and the non-governmental organizations concerned. It thus worked towards establishing the truth about serious violations of hu-man rights, by means of investigations, of the collection of witness state-ments, public hearings with victims broadcast on television and of hearings in camera with witnesses and former persons in authority, examination of official files and data acquisition from all available sources. The IER thus was able to establish the nature, gravity and the context of the violations, in the light of the principles and standards of international law on human rights, to examine cases in which there had been forced disappearances and to re-commend procedures for payment or closure of cases of disappeared per-sons whose death was proven, to contribute to the clarification of certain historical events involving violations of human rights and to determine the responsibility of State organizations and, in particular cases, unofficial actors in the violations which were examined.

As regards reparation, the IER examined and ruled on the requests re-ceived on behalf of victims of serious violations of human rights or their de-pendants. In addition to decisions on compensation, it also presented re-commendations as regards medical and psychological rehabilitation, of so-cial rehabilitation, resolution of problems of a legal, administrative or profes-sional nature which remained for certain victims, as well as cases of expro-priation. On the basis of its report that certain areas and communities were considered to have suffered collectively, in a direct or indirect way, the after-effects of the political violence and the violations which followed, the IER put a particular emphasis on reparation for communities. It thus recommended the adoption and the support of programmes of socio-economic and cultural development in favour of several cities and areas, and recommended the re-conversion of the old illegal detention centres.

Finally, the IER prepared a report, comprising the results and the conclu-sions of its investigations and analyses relating to crimes and their sur-rounding circumstances, as well as recommendations for reforms which would allow the lessons to be learnt, to guarantee the non-repetition of such violations, to erase their after-effects, to restore and reinforce confidence in State institutions and respect for the law and human rights.

As a result, the IER drew up and made public a full report now published in several languages and placed at the disposal of all (cf web site: http.//www.ier.ma). This report was based on 4 large subject areas:— Establishment of the truth and determination of responsibility. The

chapter deals with the following:

Cases involving people who were supposed to have disappeared; Arbitrary detention; Torture and ill treatment; Infringements of the right to life because of excessive and

disproportionate use of the police force.— Repair of damages and justice for victims. In this connection, the IER

gave a total assessment of its actions: Dossiers submitted: 16,861 files. Files which were the subject of positive decisions:

Decisions taken Numberof files

%

- Financial compensation 6 385 38- Financial compensation and reparation for other

damages1 895 11

- Recommendation only 1 499 9

TOTAL 9 779 58

Classification of the remaining files:

Decisions taken Numberof files

%

- Not competence and partial examination 66 0,4- Classification 18 0,1- Rejection 854 5,1- Decision of omission 150 0,9- Inadmissibility 927 5,5- Non competence 4 877 28,9- Incomplete files 190 1,1

TOTAL 6 892 42

— Reconciliation. These involve identifying the process and the basis of reconciliation as well as the fundamental preconditions to the reconciliation.

— Recommendations. In order to guarantee the non-repetition of serious violations of human rights and to consolidate the process of reform in which the country was engaged, the IER published a series of recommendations relating in particular to constitutional reforms, the setting in effect of a national strategy relating to exclusion and the monitoring of recommendations. It recommended: Consolidation of the constitutional guarantees of human rights;

Adoption and putting in effect of an integrated national strategy relating to exclusion;

The IER considered that consolidation of the rule of law required reforms in the security, justice, legislation and penal policy;

Mechanisms for monitoring.

Mr Petr Tkachenko (Russian Federation) presented the following contribution:

Consent and social stability are conditions necessary for a normal life activity and sustainable development of any community both on the na-tional and international scales.

The very fact the question discussed has been raised at such a broad forum testifies to our common recognition of the role and relevance of the true institutions of democracy and popular representation. The Russian ex-perience of the last 15 years fully confirms such stance.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union a crisis of the civil society emerged. Frankly speaking, it was a difficult time — we lived through a deepest trans-formation of the entire socio-political order, a change of the state legal and socio-economic system of Russia. It was no surprise that the first ten years were rich in crisis situations that really threatened the integrity of the coun-try and its political and socio-economic stability.

It is difficult to overestimate the role of the parliamentary institutions in overcoming those critical moments of our history. In federative Russia, along with the Federal Assembly those include the bodies of legislative (represent-ative) authority of the 89 constituent subjects of the Russian Federation, which made their full-fledged contribution to the development of their re-gions.

At the same time, let me as a representative of the Council of Federation to put the emphasis precisely on its role. Under the Russian Constitution, the Council of Federation — the upper chamber of the national parliament — oc-cupies a special place in the system of state authority bodies of the Russian Federation.

1. The Council of Federation is a major guarantor and mechanism to en-sure stability of the whole system of the federal state authority and the con-sistency and continuity in the pursuit of the national policies. This role is de-termined by the status of the upper chamber, according to which it is not subject to dissolution or simultaneous overall re-elections, as well as the chamber’s power to made decisions on calling elections of the President of the Russian Federation and to impeach the head of state.

2. The focus of the work of the Council of Federation as “the chamber of the Russian regions” is not only the expression and defence of the positions of the constituent subjects of the Russian Federation, but also the consolida-tion of the regional federal interests in order to strengthen the Russian statehood. That fact enables the chamber to be a system-creating element in shaping both the parliamentary system in Russia and the civil society in

general. This said, its inter-relations with the regions are based not on ad-ministrative methods, but on common understanding of the goals of devel-opment of the state and the society.

That is why an association of the regional parliaments was created at the Council of Federation and named “the Council of Law-Makers”. An opportun-ity appeared thanks to that council’s work to elaborate and implement con-solidated positions of the regions in the federal legislation.

3. Finally, the Council of Federation occupies a special place in the cent-ral authority structure. Within the parliament it serves as a restraining ele-ment that ensures a balanced and high-quality decision-making by the Fed-eral Assembly chambers in the realm of their shared competence. In particu-lar, the Council of Federation is the last instance on the path the draft laws have to pass in the Federal Assembly and, thus, it bears responsibility for the quality of the federal legislation.

A traditional feature of the upper chamber of the Russian parliament is that it is not engaged in politics. The non-existence of political parties’ fac-tions in the Council of Federation enables it to concentrate its attention on the realization of the state and nation-wide priorities and goals.

The issue of ensuring the human and civil rights are central among them. That is the reason the Council of Federation believes that the main goal of its activities is to make the adopted laws facilitate to the full the implement-ation and promotion of those rights in all walks of life of Russian society.

In that connection the Council of Federation has taken a commitment to produce annual reports “On the State of Legislation in the Russian Federa-tion”, the major meaning of which is to evaluate the quality of laws passed throughout each year. This said, the further promotion and guarantee of the human and civil rights is the main criterion of their quality.

The Council of Federation also pays much attention to the state of the civil society in other directions as well. To those ends the Council of Federa-tion harbours, in particular, the Joint Commission on ethnic and religion de-nomination policy, and the Council on non-governmental and commercial or-ganizations will be created soon. We consider such public bodies extremely useful for open discussions on the emerging problems and for preparation of proposals to timely resolve them. We employ the same approaches within the frameworks of the Inter-Parliamentary Assembly of the member coun-tries of the Commonwealth of Independent States too.

By today, thanks to the efforts of the Council of Federation as well, we have managed to overcome in general the systemic crisis. Political stability, sustainable economic growth, decreases in poverty and stratification of the society, launching of socially-oriented national projects and strengthening of Russia’s moral authority in the international arena — these are just some of the features of the present-day state of the country.

One could hear recently many speculations on a curtailment of freedoms in Russia and even a departure from the democratic principles. Under no cir-cumstances Russia is going to depart from realization of the most important principle of our state-building, which is the inadmissibility of lowering the already reached level of democratic development of the society.

All public opinion polls in Russia itself show that the absolute majority of the population supports the chosen political course and, moreover, insists on its consistent pursuit. A consolidation of the society and the authority in-stitutions and a real implementation of the constitutional principle of the unity of the system of state authority bodies are obvious. The political posi-tion of the Council of Federation is that exactly those results evidently testify to the positive contents of the democratic reforms.

It is only through summarizing the whole diversity of experiences accu-mulated in many countries that we can draw a complex and multicoloured, yet precisely due to that realistic picture of the contemporary world, doing that in order to strictly commeasure our next steps with the peoples’ genu-ine needs and hopes.

Mr Valentyn Zaichuk (Ukraine) presented the following contribution:

With all variety of views of modern political scientists regarding deciduous processes of social and political development of a country through establish-ment of democracy all over the world, the majority of them will not object that its most noticeable expression is a parliamentary component since it precisely reflects the spectre of political sentiments of society being the act-ive guide of the people’s expression of will.

Considering both transience and ambiguity of these processes, accom-panied by crises, parliaments standing in the center of events become their catalysts and the “last resort” to direct a boisterous stream of public protest into legitimate resolution of social crisis.

This was exactly the role the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine played in November-December 2004 during the “Orange Revolution”.

It is worth noting that the Parliament of Ukraine was the active participant in resolving the election crisis standing firmly for peaceful and fair settle-ment of the conflict that arose between the people, enraged with the flag-rant falsifications, and the power during the presidential campaign. It was also able to complete the legislative preparation of the constitutional reform that had been a stumbling stone for a long time in the political life of the country.

In this connection there is a need to briefly present the basic reasons and stages of the constitutional (or either political) reform that found the way out on the very peak of the revolutionary events in Ukraine.

Analyzing evolutionary processes in particular in the post-soviet space is confirming that in the transition period any steps towards modernization and progress contribute to the destruction of authoritarian tendencies. Such pro-cess shifts the balance between informal (which appear as a political throw-back for the developed democracies) and formal (which prevail in the West) institutions to the advantage of the latter.

In the historical dimension, short but eventful experience of Ukraine af-firms both the above-mentioned inference and evident incompleteness of the assertion of formal institutions. Therefore, enhancing of the political sys-

tem of Ukrainian society is fairly related to the political reform. This topic was first seriously talked about after the presidential elections in 1999. Though, there was no clear vision for the further development. Neverthe-less, different political forces agreed upon one major point – the basic idea of the constitutional reform was to switch to the parliamentary-presidential system. This way or another this idea managed to muster support with the representatives of different political parties during the parliamentary elec-tions in 2002.

On 26 December 2002, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on the basis of the proportional representation of the parliamentary forces established an Ad Hoc Special Commission on Elaboration of Draft Laws related to Amend-ments to the Constitution of Ukraine.

At the same time awareness for the need of the political reform found fa-vor among Ukrainian society let alone political elite. The interest in the no-tion of the “super-presidential power” and “heavy hand” slowly dwindled. In 2002-2003 nearly 50% of the population supported such an idea. In another half a year 80% of the respondents were supportive of redistribution of powers to the advantage of the Parliament.

The new electoral law adopted on 25 March 2004, which envisages pro-portional system and strict lists as well as fixed electoral bar of 3% made the implementation of the political reform a step closer. This was though a decisive but just a step on the hard way towards the political reform. On 8 April 2004 as a result of the nominal voting the Verkhovna Rada did not ap-prove the draft law on amendments to the Constitution (294 votes “for” of 300 needed).

Thus, the issue of moving along the way to the political reform entered a new stage of the development. There appeared proposals as for the continu-ation of the Constitutional process on the basis of other draft laws that were positively appraised by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and by the ex-perts of the Venice Commission.

The results of the mentioned voting corroborated time and again that Ukraine overcame another stage on building up democratic foundations of the parliamentarism. Currently, the parliamentarism in Ukraine is getting more mature acquiring features of self-sufficiency inherent for every country with civil society.

It is worthy of notice that we have maintained continued feedback with PACE as regards events in Ukraine. The presidential elections closely con-nected with the political reform were approaching. Yet the election cam-paign came to the forefront from among the most topical events in the country.

As 31 October 2004 — the first round of the election of the President of Ukraine — drew nearer the tension in society was growing. Firstly because of the numerous violations of the constitutional provisions for fair, transparent and democratic elections.

The events in the Parliament adequately reflected what was going on among people. In the moment of the most deteriorated situation after the run-off elections on 21 October 2004 when people took to the streets protesting against systematic breaches of the Constitution, current laws and

one of the fundamental rights to free expression of will, the Verkhovna Rada adopted the famous Resolution on the political crisis in the country. The Par-liament declared invalid the outcomes of the run-off elections and expressed a no-confidence vote to the Central Electoral Commission due to its inappro-priate execution of duties stipulated in the Constitution and the laws of Ukraine.

Apart from this the Parliament found necessary to investigate the viola-tions of the electoral legislation, to improve voting proceedings and to spe-cify the mechanisms of judicial control.

Furthermore, the Verkhovna Rada was one of the stabilizing factors when the activities of the Government were blocked. It was acknowledged by the international mediators who assisted in settling political crisis as well as by the leading national political scientists. Finally the idea of the political reform came to the surface again when the situation seemed to develop into the stalemate. By the compromise decision of the participants of the negotiation process the Verkhovna Rada returned to consider this issue again. On 8 December 2004 the Parliament approved by 402 votes (of 450) the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to the Constitution”. According to the law the par-liamentary-presidential form of ruling will enter into force from 1 January 2006. This almost unanimous decision by the people’s deputies resulted in the abatement of tension paving the way for a final resolution of the conflict.

The adopted law provides for the extension of the rights and authority of the Parliament in its relations with the Government:— the Parliament under the submission of the President of Ukraine

appoints to office the Prime Minister and under the submission of the latter approves the composition of the Government;

— accountability of the Government to the Verkhovna Rada;— the Parliament is authorized to dismiss the Cabinet of Ministers.

Under the new system the extended authority of the President is to dis-band the Parliament before the end of its term.

In conclusion, the advantages of the political reform are speed-up of the democratization of society, consolidation and structuring of political forces, advancement of interoperability between the Parliament and the Govern-ment. In a nutshell the law implements more effective form of state ruling and strengthening of parliamentary role.

There are some provisions in the new law, which need improving because of the urgency the law was adopted with. However, the main thing is that Ukraine has entered a new stage in the development of democratic institu-tions peacefully. The country managed to resolve the political crisis in a non-violent manner, which can be done by far not all countries, even the most developed democracies.

The Ukrainian Parliament played a positive symbolic role during those events and fully lived up to the statement that only representative body can reflect the will of the people in democratic society the best way possible.

Given the achievements of the “Orange Revolution” that constitutes a single whole with the final stage of the political reform one can say that the Ukrainian people together with its Parliament have written one of the most

notable pages in the history of the XXI century. This has been another con-firmation of irrevocability of democratic future of the human civilization.

Mr Carlos Hoffmann-Contreras (Chile) thought that the subject of na-tional reconciliation and the role which Parliaments could play in that pro-cess had constituted one of the main challenges of the past decade and would certainly remain a question of essential importance.

The re-establishment of democratic institutions, of Justice and the rule of law after a period of crisis was a complex process for all the actors in society and political life. At the end of the 1980s several Latin American countries had put systems into place which had been imitated on other continents.

In Chile, a committee had been set up with the objective of establishing the historical truth and to make proposals for recompensing victims. The Chilean “Truth and Reconciliation” Committee, made up of members with unimpeachable moral authority and which had been similar to organizations in various countries (Argentina, Salvador, Bolivia etc) had established the facts, identified victims, supported their moral right to recompense and made concrete proposals to the public authorities aimed at forging social and political reconciliation.

In this process the role of Members of Parliament seemed important. The proposed recompense in effect assumed that the law would be agreed set-ting down financial payments, the potential beneficiaries and the definition of the state of being a victim: this was the only way of avoiding abuses, mis-understandings or further appeals. The serious approach of those involved in the legislative work, in the context of extreme political sensitivity — which also had significant financial repercussions — had been an essential element in dealing with this matter adequately.

Mrs Lulama Matyolo-Dube (South Africa) thought that the basic question arose from ethnic conflict, which could be dealt with. Such conflict came about as result of tensions within contemporary African society and the main issue was how to build political systems which involved everyone and excluded nobody.

Mr Mateo Sorinas Balfego (Council of Europe) said that Europe had not been exempt from crises in the course of the last 10 years which, if they had not been as serious as those in Africa, had nonetheless been able to compromise the political stability of a number of states. This was the case in Albania, in the former Yugoslav Republic, in Moldavia, in Georgia and in the Ukraine.

In these situations, the chief task assigned to the Council of Europe was to contribute to the re-establishment of confidence between parties, which was often damaged through the political crisis. To this end, a delegation of the Council including representatives of the five political groups of the Par-liamentary Assembly went to the area affected to talk to the authorities and the political interests.

This experience had been extremely positive and the presence of Mem-bers of Parliament from different countries allowed the local actors to regard the questions causing the conflict with greater balance. In some cases, sev-eral visits had been necessary, either to Strasbourg or to set up Round Tables in the areas affected. Co-operation had also been established with other international Parliamentary assemblies.

Mr Prosper Vokouma (Burkina Faso) thought that the question of the role of Parliaments and Members of Parliament in national reconciliation had a special importance and complexity and thought that the report should be presented on this subject by the Association.

Mr Anders Forsberg, President, supported the idea of preparing a de-tailed report on this matter.

Mr Marc Rwabahungu (Burundi) said that the Greater Lakes region had had a difficult history. In a work which he had published “At the heart of the national crises in Rwanda and Burundi: the struggle for resources” (Paris, l’Harmattan, 2004), he set out the evidence for the cause of tensions arising from contradictions between the agrarian system and demographic pressures.

The vast economic interests involved meant that possible solutions had to be looked at within an international framework: close links between various countries had created a system of communications. Apart from establishing inter-community peace, good governance and education seem to be basic values, which were aimed at preventing later generations from being prison-ers of the received ideas of their parents.

Mrs Halima Ahmed (ECOWAS) underlined the importance of the cur-rent problem to the ECOWAS. ECOWAS had provided forces to maintain peace in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea-Bissau.

ECOWAS was made up of 15 member states and its Parliament was still young since it had only been established five years before. Its role was im-portant in conflict resolution, even though peacekeeping was not part of its basic tasks.

Mr Constantin Tshisuaka Kabanda (Democratic Republic of Congo) said that the Democratic Republic had only recently emerged from several years of war which had resulted in nearly 4 million deaths. The Par-liament which had been established had tried to resolve the questions which had been at the origin of the war — as a result, laws had been agreed on na-tionality, amnesties and integration of soldiers. The Constitution, which had been agreed by referendum, should allow unity to be restored to the coun-try.

Parliament had established a Committee for Restitution, with the aim of returning goods which had been stolen. Over 1,575 cases had been referred to it and in 312 of these cases, goods had been restored to their legitimate owner (the State or private persons). As far as the law on amnesty was con-cerned, this attempted to re-establish everybody’s rights and obtained re-ciprocal pardons.

Mr Hafnaoui Amrani (Algeria) noted that the origin of troubles were different in different countries: terrorism, inter-ethnic tensions or social

protest. In Algeria, radical Islamists had found fertile soil for the many dis-satisfactions felt by the people — injustice, poverty, economic crisis.

Reconciliation was a long road, which was not covered with flowers. It was to be hoped that countries which traversed these difficult situations would nonetheless find it.

PORTUGAL AND THE CONVERGENCE CRITERIA

The budget for 2006 and the measures for reduction of the deficit

by way of reduction of public expenditure, in the contextof accuracy relating to receipts

—

Adelina de Sá CarvalhoSecretary general of the Assembly of the Republic (Portugal)

Portugal joined the European Communities 20 years ago. Since then the evolution of the Community has signified new challenges for my country, which had just emerged from an authoritarian regime, without free elec-tions, that lasted for almost 50 years from 1926 to 1974.

The challenges of development and of keeping abreast with the evolution of international politics caused the Portuguese economy rapidly to adapt to the demands of the European economy.

The successive accessions of other Member-States to the European Union, in particular the major enlargement in 2004, meant that from being a major beneficiary of Community funds Portugal became a contributor to the Community budget, within a perspective of solidarity between the peoples of the Union.

So, from 1999 onwards, with the implementation of the single currency (the Euro) and the definition of convergence criteria aimed at stabilising the economy in the Euro Zone, it became essential to fulfil these convergence criteria in particular as regards the budget deficit.

The principal guidelines of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) of the Euro Zone, giving more emphasis to the long term sustainability of the public debt and encouraging Member-States to improve the quality of their public finances and direct spending and investments towards those that contribute

to greater potential growth and more jobs, are observed in the core docu-ments of Portugal’s economic policy.

As the SGP establishes a ceiling of 3% of GDP for the deficit and 60% of GDP for the debt, Member-States’ budgets are forced to seek an equilibrium, as non-fulfilment can give rise to an excessive deficit procedure, EDP. Whenever the deficit exceeds 3% and the country does not set in motion any intentionally compensatory measure in the period of ten months, the Commission may itself action that sanctionative mechanism.

Without prejudice of these limits being debatable, it seems inarguable that the aim of the SGP is, albeit with some short-term flexibility, to discip-line in the medium and long term the levels of deficit and the debt, demo-cratically guaranteeing Member States full autonomy in their manner of achieving it, that is, without interfering directly in the ceilings of the ex-pense components.

As we all know, budgets are proposed by government and voted annually in our parliaments. However, given a number of conditioning factors, many government drafts are already in my country conditioned by fulfilment of the European Union rules, so that the Portuguese Government has success-ively submitted draft budgets to ensure said fulfilment.

Portugal’s draft law on the 2006 Budget which the Government presented in Parliament was no exception. In addition to defining the budgetary, finan-cial and tax policies, it sought to fulfil the target of maintaining the deficit of the actual budget at figures very close to 3% or to ensure the demonstration of its sustained reduction.

In fact, from 2002 onwards when the PSD-CDS/PP coalition government was headed by Dr. Durão Barroso, currently the President of the European Commission, budgetary consolidation became a key objective. The deficit was reduced through the application of measures designed to halt the growth in public spending and also of extraordinary measures that gave rise to some controversy concerning the true dimension of the deficit.

As the deficit came to 6% of GDP in 2005, the 4.7% target for 2006 — without resorting to extraordinary revenue — is the major objective of this Budget.

Together with the Budget and as a result of the new Law on Budgetary Framework, the Government submitted a strategic document: the 2005-2009 Stability and Growth Programme, which governs the country’s eco-nomic and financial policies for the period of the current legislature.

This Programme points to strong restrictions on public spending, hand in hand with an effort to increase revenue, in particular by combating tax eva-sion.

Considering the 2 documents just mentioned, the State Budget and the 2005-2009 Stability and Growth Programme, we can set out the main budget consolidation measures taken by the Government:— Restructuring Public Administration— Restraints on social security and health co-payment expenditure— Budgetary control of regional and local administrations

— Simplifying and moralising the tax system, improving the efficiency of the tax administration and combating tax evasion.

1. RESTRUCTURING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIONIn this area the main measures recently adopted and in place are the re-

structuring of central administration by rationalising and strongly reducing the structures, eliminating organizations with parallel competencies and simplifying administrative procedures.

Also, reorganizing the education, health services, justice and local admin-istration networks will optimise resources by closing down health units and some schools to ensure more rational management. Other measures taken in this regard include reform of prison establishments, namely their privat-isation, and the judicial territorial map.

Reviewing the Public Administration’s careers and remunerations and evaluating its performance will also ensure a correct assessment of its needs.

Finally, certain measures are being taken, such as freezing automatic pro-gression mechanisms, imposing restrictive measures on staff recruitment, and freezing complementary remunerations.

2. RESTRAINTS ON SOCIAL SECURITY AND HEALTH CO-PAYMENT EXPENDITURE

On this point certain measures are being taken, such as a plan to combat social security fraud and tax evasion, the definition of a ceiling on pensions and establishing a new formula for calculating pensions. Furthermore, the retirement age in the Civil Service will rise from 60 to 65, over a period of 10 years.

On the other hand the principle of convergence between the general so-cial protection system and civil servants’ health subsystems has been estab-lished, extinguishing some exceptions to these regimes operating in the Armed Forces, the Judiciary and the security forces, as well as a change in the policy on the co-payment of medicaments.

3. BUDGETARY CONTROL OF REGIONAL AND LOCAL ADMINISTRATIONS

In this field the finance laws of the autonomous regions and the budget-ary discipline laws of local administration, heavily dependent on bank loans, are currently being reviewed, hand in hand with the creation of the figure of a financial controller in each ministry who will directly monitor the adminis-tration in each sector.

4. SIMPLIFYING AND MORALISING THE TAX SYSTEM, IMPROVING THE EFFICIENCY OF THE TAX ADMINISTRATION AND COMBATING TAX EVASION

As our tax system is extremely complex, the new measures have been designed to simplify it, helping to achieve greater efficiency, something that is already having repercussions on the greater capacity to combat tax eva-sion.

Within this scope, some measures in particular will be mentioned: these include the publication of the list of people with outstanding tax or social se-curity debts and also the requirement for all restaurants and bars to issue invoices.

The aim of these measures is not only to achieve greater efficiency in Por-tugal’s public administration at all levels but also to create objective condi-tions to achieve greater convergence with our European partners and a greater participation in the globalisation process.

The Portuguese Parliament approved the draft Budget and this will natur-ally impose said limitation on public spending on Portugal through imple-mentation of the measures mentioned above.

As far as revenue is concerned and as already mentioned, combating tax evasion and fraud, particularly on income tax, will produce its results. In fact, quite recently the Portuguese Social Security announced an increase in the collection of revenue due to a stricter programme designed to apply the laws in force.

This is the information I would like to share with you, giving you the por-trait of a country that fulfils its international obligations and is preparing for the new challenges of a globalized economy, rationalising public administra-tion and reducing its weight on public spending.

It is important to point out that my country is experiencing a particularly interesting political time: as a result of the recent electoral framework, we now have four election-free years ahead of us, both in terms of parliament-ary, local and presidential elections.

This, together with the fact that there is a single-party majority in Parlia-ment belonging to the Socialist Party (who have 121 MPs out of a total of 230), will tend to create conditions for an extremely exacting policy to be conducted in a context of political stability, without which it would certainly be harder to implement measures that are structuring and for that very reason likely to occasion controversy and resistance.

The two documents I mentioned, the State Budget and the 2005-2009 Stability and Growth Programme provide the legal background for the meas-ures that Portugal has been applying recently and that Parliament also has the duty to fulfil and enforce.

The political assessment of these objectives in parliamentary terms has also been made, both in the commissions and in the plenary debates, in par-ticular with the Prime Minister and the Government. The results are widely broadcast to the nation through the media, the aim being, to quote the Prime Minister of Portugal in his debate on the 2006 State Budget in Parlia-ment, “for the country to start once and for all to confront the problem of

the disequilibrium in public accounts with seriousness, persistence and de-termination.”

Mrs Jacqueline Biesheuvel-Vermeijden (Netherlands) asked what impact the new budgetary policy had on the budget and resources of the Portuguese Parliament.

Mrs Claressa Surtees (Australia) asked whether the reform had changed the way in which Parliament examined the budget.

Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini (Indonesia) wanted to know what proportion of the state budget went to Parliament and to educational expenditure and how the state budget was controlled in Portugal.

Mrs Adelina de Sá Carvalho (Portugal) noted that the Portuguese Par-liament was independent in settling its budget, although it recognised the need to set a good example for other public institutions within the prevailing economic circumstances of the country and to take account of public opin-ion.

In response to Mrs Claressa Surtees, she said that the new framework had led to a revision in the way in which Parliament examined and controlled the state budget. The Committee on Finance now wanted to be given a daily ac-count of public expenditure — even if this meant that the information was not given within the time limits required by Parliament and met with resist-ance from the Executive and, in particular, the Finance Ministry.

In reply to Mrs I. Gusti Ayu Darsini, she said that Parliament received 0.001% of the state budget. As far as control of the budget was concerned, Portugal had a Court of Accounts which controlled how the ministries and territorial authorities managed their budgets.

DETAILS OF THE BICAMERAL SYSTEM IN BURUNDI and the three functions of the Senate: national reconciliation, maintaining close contact with the electorate,

consensual representation:political but not partisan

—

Jean SindayigayaSecretary General of the Senate (Burundi)

I. INTRODUCTION: POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC CONTEXTBurundi is a small landlocked and mountainous country in Central Africa

bordered on the west by the Democratic Republic of Congo, on the North by Rwanda and on the east by Tanzania. It has 6.7 million inhabitants and an area of 27,834 square kilometres. The average density of the population is estimated at 239 inhabitants per square kilometre. It is thus one of the most populous countries of Africa.

Since independence in 1962, Burundi has seen cyclic inter-ethnic viol-ence, the last in October 1993 with the assassination of the first democratic-ally elected President: Melchior Ndadaye.

This assassination was the beginning of the long bloody civil war, from which Burundi could emerge only by negotiation and the signature of cease-fire agreements between the various belligerents. The most important agreement was that concluded between the then Government and CNDD-FDD, in November 2003. This overall agreement of cease-fire was a decisive step towards an effective return of peace and security in the whole country.

The progressive return of peace and security allowed political partners in Burundi to engage speedily with the democratic process which had abruptly stopped in 1993. The promulgation of the post-transition Constitution on 18 March 2005, was another decisive stage which made it possible to put an end to the transitional period by opening the way to the marathon electoral process which saw six elections in six months.

The communal elections took place on 3 June 2005. They were followed by Parliamentary elections on 4 July 2005 and then by the senatorial elec-tions of 29 July 2005. This process ended in the election of the President of the Republic on 19 August 2005, by the National Assembly and the Senate assembled in congress.

All these elections were mainly won by the CNDD-FDD party. A bicameral Parliament was set up in accordance with article 147 of the Constitution. A National Parliament made up of 118 deputies and a Senate including 49 sen-ators is now ready for work. Parliament is based on a popular mandate and consequently has the means to achieve its constitutional goals.

The establishment of legitimate democratic institutions constitutes a de-cisive stage in the restoration of peace and the introduction of the rule of law, the design and putting into effect of development programmes inten-ded to rehabilitate the people of Burundi in their aspiration for economic and political prosperity.

Nevertheless, many important challenges remain. The country is in a diffi-cult economic situation. More than ten years of civil war, increasingly sterile and limited land, unforeseeable climatic changes, are some of the causes of a devastating famine which has badly shaken areas of the country.

All the economic indicators are today in the red:— the GNP per capita is less than $100, in fact much lower than the

average of sub-Saharan Africa ($490);— the rate of adult illiteracy is 52%; — the rate of infection by AIDS is increasing quickly and already affects

9.4% of the urban population of the country and 2.5% of its rural population;

— the life expectancy at birth which was 51 years in 1990 was 48 years in 2003.

All these challenges cannot be overcome without a good basis in demo-cracy and good democratic governance.

II. BRIEF HISTORICAL VIEW OF DEMOCRACY IN BURUNDIFrom independence, proclaimed on 1 July 1962, to the signing of the

Agreement of Arusha on 28 August 2000, Burundi knew only one very short period of a bicameral system, i.e. the system in which Parliament is com-posed of two Chambers, the National Assembly and the Senate.

II.1.The Monarchical ConstitutionThe Constitution of the Kingdom of Burundi, promulgated by the King Mw-

ambutsa IV on 16 October 1962, allowed for the creation of a Senate since it indicated that “the legislative power is exerted collectively by the King, the National Assembly and the Senate” (Article 24), but it did not impose it: it was restricted to envisage the possibility of it — article 50 provided that “the Senate could be created on the initiative of the legislative power” (in fact, the King and the National Assembly).

The Senate was thus actually created only the day following the parlia-mentary elections of May 1965, the 12 senators then being elected or co-op-ted.

But on 8 July 1966, the new King, Ntare V, suspended the Constitution... This finished the bicameral experiment, which in fact lasted only a few months, until the reappearance of the Senate by the Agreement of Arusha.

II.2.The Agreement Of Arusha (28 August 2000)The Agreement of Arusha called the long conflict in our country “a basic-

ally political conflict with extremely important ethnic dimensions” and “con-flict rising from a political class struggle to gain power and to keep it” and set out suggested solutions to avoid a repeat of a similar set of affairs, among which appeared the promulgation “of a new Constitution inspired by the realities of life in Burundi..., a new organization of the institutions of the State so that they are capable of integrating with each other and reassuring all elements of Burundi society”.

It is in this context and with this point of view that the Senate of Burundi was created: it is at the same time a means of reconciliation and controls the process of reconciliation.

III. THE COMPOSITION OF THE SENATE: INCLUSION AND PARITY

If the National Assembly is elected by the direct vote of all, the Senate is elected by the indirect vote of all. Its composition, in fact, is made up by the four following methods:i. Each of the 17 provinces elects two senators, Hutu and Tutsi, by differ-

ent polls. The principle of double parity applies here: parity between the two principal ethnic groups, whatever their respective proportions, and parity between the provinces, whatever the differences of the size of the populations in the various provinces.

ii. The vote for all is not direct but indirect: the senatorial electoral college is not the whole of the citizens of Burundi with the voting rights, but the members of the communal councils of each province. The senators are thus officials elected by elected officials, and they at the same time represent, through this system, the whole of the population and the local communities.

iii. Beside the elected senators, the Senate also includes the former pres-idents of the Republic, who are full members for life of the Senate. That those persons having occupied the highest burdens of the State are thus members of the Senate corresponds well to its double role of in-tegration and wisdom.

iv. Finally the Senate includes three co-opted members representing the batwa group so that the ethnic representation of the nation of Burundi is complete.

All these elements turn the Senate into an assembly ensuring the repres-entation of the diverse population and the territories, a political but not par-

tisan assembly, an assembly of regulation and moderation at the service of national reconciliation.

IV. FUNCTIONS OF THE SENATE: TO LEGISLATE, CONTROLAND ACT AS GUARANTOR OF RECONCILIATION

IV.1. The Senate As Legislative AssemblyThe Senate as legislative assembly takes part as a matter of course in the

preparation of the law, and must in particular, before they become law, ap-prove amendments to the Constitution (majority of two thirds), organic bills and electoral bills. It can propose amendments and deposit private bills for examination by the National Assembly.

IV.2. The Senate, Guarantor Of ReconciliationBut its major function does not lie in its participation in the preparation of

the law: it lies in the function of monitoring and control which are entrusted to it and which make it the guarantor of the process of reconciliation.

It is thus generally responsible for scrutiny of the implementation of the Agreement of Arusha, and in particular of the scrutiny of the application of the constitutional provisions requiring representation or balance in the com-position of any parts of the public service or of defence and security bodies.

It is pursuant to this general duty also but also of that of representation of local communities which imposes on it a duty to scrutinize and, if necessary, to make recommendations to make sure that no area or no group is ex-cluded from the benefit of the public services; that it must approve the bills concerning the scope and powers of the provinces, the communes and the hills; that it must finally ensure that the communal councils generally reflect the ethnic diversity of their electorate.

It is in this important role of vigilant guardian of reconciliation and As-sembly of Elders that it advises the President of the Republic and the Presid-ent of the National Assembly on any question, in particular of a legislative nature.

IV.3. The Regulating Senate, Guaranteeing ReconciliationIt is in application finally of this role of regulator and guarantor of equilib-

rium that the Senate exercises power to approve nominations to the most important offices of the State.

The Senate alone has thus the power to approve nominations to the fol-lowing offices: — Chiefs of the Bodies of Defence and Security; — Governors of Provinces; — Ambassadors; the Ombudsman; — Members of the Higher Council of the Magistracy; — Members of the Supreme Court; — Members of the Constitutional Court; — the Attorney General of the Republic and Magis-trates of the General Parquet of the Republic; — the President of the Court of Appeal and the President of the Administrative Court; — the Attorney Gen-eral to the Court of Appeal; — Presidents of the Courts of Bankruptcy, the

Commercial Court and the Labour Court; — Public Prosecutors and — Mem-bers of the Independent National Electoral Commission.

In conclusion, the Senate of Burundi presents very marked special charac-teristics, strongly differentiating it from the National Assembly. Its mode of election, its composition, its functions make it a legislative assembly with a political but not partisan character, a representative assembly of the public and territories, a regulating assembly with a special guardian role, in short an assembly rooted in the nature of Burundi life and deeply in touch with the strongest aspirations of the public: national reconciliation, institutional and political stabilization, moderation in the exercise of power, in the service of peace and balanced development.

Mr Bedane Foto (Ethiopia) asked how protection was ensured for eth-nic minorities in the Senate. In addition, how did the two Chambers of Parlia-ment in Burundi exercise mutual control?

Mr Georges Brion (Belgium) asked whether the new Senate had already had occasion to carry out in practice its role as guarantor of recon-ciliation, particularly in the realm of public services and communal councils.

Mr Prosper Vokouma (Burkina Faso) asked what the total number of senators was, taking into account former Heads of State, representatives of the Batwa ethnic group and the procedure for co-opting women.

Mr Jean Sindayigaya (Burundi) said that the Senate in Burundi was in-clusive and no component factor of the nation was overlooked. The Batwa ethnic group therefore had a right to three seats — the community itself be-ing responsible for the means of designating its three representatives.

Women had the right to have 30% of the representation in the Senate; if the number of women elected was insufficient, then supplementary senators were co-opted in order to reach the proper proportion. Each party with over 5% of the vote had therefore a “right” to two co-opted women senators.

The roll of 49 senators was made up as follows: 34 senators elected by province (that is, 17 elected for each of the two provinces); three represent-atives of the Batwa community; four former Heads of State; and eight co-op-ted women.

In response to the question from Mr Georges Brion, he said that senators were elected by communal councils. As far as the civil service was con-cerned, nominations to the highest ranks were vetted in order to ensure a balance between tribes.